September 21, 2011
Why Ron Paul Will Never Win
Inside a Pizza-and-Conspiracy-Fueled Meeting for the Great White Libertarian Hope
Tools
+ Enlarge this Image
DANNY SCHWARTZ
Some 30 people in the back room of Piecora's are heckling a man for claiming that the World Trade Center collapsed because planes piloted by Al Qaeda crashed into them. A ponytailed man shouts, "Are you telling us that you believe the government's story of 9/11?" Someone else interjects, "You believe these 'experts'? Who are your 'experts'? Who's paying them?" Then a vest-wearing older woman who identifies herself as "a scientist" stands up and bellows, "What are your credentials? What are your credentials? You! You! What are your credentials? I want to know!"
It's the day after the 10th anniversary of 9/11, and this is the monthly Seattle meeting of Campaign for Liberty (C4L), a Virginia-based 501(c)(4) lobbying organization that "neither supports nor opposes candidates for public office." Immediately following the C4L meeting, the King County Ron Paul 2012 organization—a group with the same organizers and 24 of the same members—will meet to discuss their plans for getting Ron Paul elected president of the United States. For now, they are barely giving their attention to a rumpled man who keeps digging through the dense forest of files on his laptop in a futile effort to dissuade them from conspiracy theories. Images of the Twin Towers falling over and over again are projected onto a large screen while people munch on their pizza and grumble.
Stranger Personals
After the rumpled man finishes receiving his abuse, a woman stands up and gives a rambling speech about mind control and using sleight of hand to distract the masses. "This is new information," she says three or four times in rapid succession. She talks about Hurricane Erin, a "category 5 hurricane" that was "set for New York" in the days before 9/11. Immediately following the attacks, Erin "dissipated off the coast of Cape Cod. Nobody ever says anything about this." The room is abuzz with the possibilities this presents. Raucous applause fills the space.
I don't quite follow her—is she really suggesting that 9/11 was a massive distraction for some sort of beta test for a government-created weather-control device?—but rather than elaborating, the meeting moves on to official business. We receive an update on a Mercer Island–based anti-fluoridation campaign (a woman audibly gasps when the project head says, "We were not allowed to speak against fluoridation" at a city council meeting), and then someone announces that a local anarchist group wanted to engage the C4L in a debate, which elicits derisive laughter from the assembly. "We don't have time for this," someone sneers.
Then a man in the back of the room stands up and talks about Ron Paul's performance earlier that night in the Republican presidential debates. Paul said, "This whole idea that the whole Muslim world is... attacking us because we're free and prosperous is just not true," and got booed for it by the teabaggers in the audience. "That booing will give Ron Paul more traction with Democrats," the man explains. He's interrupted by event organizers who tell him that because C4L needs to stay "nonpartisan," he has to hold his Paul-centric comments for five minutes, when the C4L officially becomes the King County Ron Paul organization.
Five minutes later, the same people sit in the same room and talk about Ron Paul. They decide that what they need to win is "shoe leather." They need to talk with Democrats and Republicans alike, to convince both sides of the aisle that the Texas representative is their man. Democrats shouldn't be a problem, an older man says with a grimace: "They voted a Marxist Democrat into office, so why not a Libertarian Republican?"
An earnest young man says he voted for Paul in 2008, and he's distressed to see that the poll numbers are roughly the same as they were four years ago. Is there hope, he asks, for Paul as a serious contender? One organizer says everyone in the room should become a Republican precinct captain, and when someone asks if they should identify as Paul supporters when the captains are being chosen, he's told, cagily, "I don't want to say be a weasel, but you don't have to be completely honest." A man in a suit offers a brief field guide to the two kinds of Republicans they'll encounter while undercover at Republican meetings: "sheeple" and "thinking Reagan conservatives." The former will "go with whoever" the crowd selects, he says, but the latter will be easy converts once they're presented with Paul's theories and ideas.
And oh, what theories and ideas Ron Paul has! Whenever progressives hear Paul speak, they experience a momentary shudder of recognition. This happens whenever Paul talks about how the government shouldn't care about what people do in the bedroom, or his pro-drug-legalization policies, or when he discusses our entanglements in the Middle East and bringing our troops home. "He actually makes sense," the progressive will think, just before Paul turns a rhetorical corner and starts talking—his arms flying about like a Muppet—about privatizing the education system as well as national parks and also Social Security, or when he explains how business can police itself without government intrusion on environmental issues. (And if that isn't enough, a quick Google search for Paul's long history of association with white supremacists is enough to send most reasonable people running away from him at top speed.)
So what kind of person becomes an avid Ron Paul follower? The kind of person who is a 9/11 Truther. (In fact, the first time I ever heard Ron Paul discussed as a serious candidate was while reporting a story about 9/11 Truthers for The Stranger in 2007.)
Truther thought tends to resemble Zeno's arrow paradox: There is no idea so simple that you can't complicate it by breaking it in half. We all saw planes smash into those buildings. Therefore, the planes must not have caused the collapse. Clearly, the collapse must have been caused by explosives implanted in the buildings by black ops teams beforehand. And Al Qaeda claimed responsibility for the attacks, so the attacks were obviously caused by the US government, which claimed that Al Qaeda was responsible as part of a labyrinthine plot to invade Iraq and topple Saddam Hussein.
Keep cutting motivations and facts in half, and you wind up claiming that the planes we saw on 9/11 were sophisticated holograms and the collapses were caused by focused laser beams or, say, that the whole thing was a cover-up for a weather-control satellite test run. You can just keep chopping that arrow down to subatomic particles and you never run out of ideas to parse into something crazier and even more dramatic.
Ron Paul appeals to Truthers precisely because he makes a pitch for one seemingly unbreakable idea: the Constitution. If you reject the idea of the Constitution, you reject the idea of the United States of America; it's the one idea you can't split in half. Therefore, Truthers cling to it—and to Ron Paul's fundamentalist interpretation of it—like a life raft. It's religious dogma for skeptics: How do you feel about traffic light cameras? Are they in the Constitution? No? Then fuck 'em. Did the founding fathers have Social Security in mind? Hell, no. Fuck it, then—let the olds rot in hell.
This philosophy fits with all the various One World Government conspiracy theorists, an antidote to the creeping global information control plots that Paulites see themselves rebelling against.
Based on what I saw at King County's Ron Paul meetup, their candidate doesn't have a chance in hell—they're not organized, and they're not interested in learning anything about the corrupt system they're trying to change in order to change it. It's for the best, anyway: They're so comfortable on the outside of the machine that their brains would automatically liquidate if they found themselves on the inside. They're meatspace internet trolls, arguing violently—valiantly in their own minds—against the world outside their windows in the defense of the single indestructible idea that their jittery, delusional minds can cling to: In a world under assault by shadowy cabinets of scary foreigners seeking to enslave the masses in concentration camps, Truthers will remain the heroes of their own story, as long as they remain faithful to the Constitution as their God, and Ron Paul as their liberator, their One True Prophet. 
1
Paul's article is spot on in describing Ron Paul/Truther bobbleheads. I work with one of these guys. When I tell my coworker about how Ron Paul's policies would hurt the industry we work in, my coworker becomes upset and asks me a million questions that he pulls out of thin air, that have absolutely no relevance to our jobs. And my coworker is in a financial pickle as it is, so he has more reason than I to vote for his job. Libertarianism would fuck my coworker over very well. Just another example of someone who votes against their self interest. Good article, Paul.
4
Credentials! Credentials! Do you need credentials to valiantly debunk the government's nefarious chicanery, or are only the "sheeple" who don't blame the government for 9/11 obligated to provide them?
5
So, what do we do? Keep voting in the same two corrupt parties? Both parties keep imperialism, colonialism, geo-political meddling in the Middle East and elsewhere around the world. Both parties maintain over 700 bases in 130 countries around the world in order to keep their military industrial complex alive.Both parties are bought off by corporate interest.As a lefty, I'm tired of seeing the same crap over and over,watching Obama maintain Bush era policies. The Obama admin. promised to back off on DEA marijuana arrest, promised to cut back on deportations and has deported more immigrants than Bush, promised to make a mends in foreign policies,promised to support Palestinian statehood which as of tomorrow, the United States will veto just to protect the global interest in the Middle East and keep funding billions of dollars to racist pro-apartheid Israel, promised to back off on the Patriot Act 2, and he didn't follow through on any of it. So, maybe Ron Paul may not be the complete answer, but at least he is willng to address the issues that both parties haven't addressed in over 20 years. You want more info, check out DemocracyNow.org and Nation of Change, just to name a couple of Independent news sites. Peace brothers and sisters, there's just not enough of it.
7
ah...more smarter than thou insight from the stranger. maybe the stranger should get off their faux disenchanted high horse and post something of substance. why are truthers concerned? do they not have some legitimate ideas? yes...some of them are completely insane, and yes libertarians aren't the best of the bunch (understatement cough cough) but this article reeks of pandering and is just an excuse to trash paul, minimize the average persons concerns about the crap the democrats have miserably failed to handle, and subtly keep the status quo in place. weak. the truthers are lost in a sea of disinformation but at least they are trying and they have to guts to say what they believe no matter how fucking insane it sounds.,,they dont need to hide behind a mask of pseudo intellectual judgement which is what you are doing. this type of crap from you guys is just boring as usual. please get a life. other than that, FUN article!
8
@7: "the truthers are lost in a sea of disinformation but at least they are trying and they have to guts to say what they believe no matter how fucking insane it sounds." Where on earth does this idea that trying to do something, anything, is intrinsically better than doing nothing? Where does this idea that believing insane things is better than skepticism come from? Willful ignorance should not be celebrated, nor should the desire to publicly and proudly proclaim that ignorance. Pursuing policies that make things substantially worse than the status quo for more people than they make things better (especially if one of those people for whom things get worse is oneself) is not better than supporting the status quo, no matter how bad the status quo is.
I think Paul's critique is pretty well-thought-out (i.e. plain "intellectual judgement", not "pseudo intellectual judgement"): as he mentions, Progressives think Ron Paul makes sense (some good ideas!) until he starts talking about dismantling all government infrastructure (and, of course, his weird anti-agency, pro-government-biopolitics stance against abortion).
I think Paul's critique is pretty well-thought-out (i.e. plain "intellectual judgement", not "pseudo intellectual judgement"): as he mentions, Progressives think Ron Paul makes sense (some good ideas!) until he starts talking about dismantling all government infrastructure (and, of course, his weird anti-agency, pro-government-biopolitics stance against abortion).
9
There is literally nothing that these people can't turn into a conspiracy. To my great embarrassment, my father is a 9/11 Truther (it makes me *crazy*). The other day he mentioned a YouTube video he found that makes the case that the seismic record for the recent D.C. earthquake more closely resembles that of an explosion. Well! If there's someone speculating about it in a YouTube video, then it must be true. Just like the one he sent me during the swine flu epidemic telling me not to get the vaccine, which was tainted as part of a plan by Baxter International to kill off a huge percentage of the population, thus solving the overpopulation problem. This last video was made by a nun in Spain who inexplicably had the inside scoop on this plan. I really wish I were making this shit up.
The psychology of conspiracy theorists is interesting. My father for instance is actually a pretty intelligent man, but the conspiracy theories make him feel like he's "in the know" and thus superior to the unwashed masses.
The psychology of conspiracy theorists is interesting. My father for instance is actually a pretty intelligent man, but the conspiracy theories make him feel like he's "in the know" and thus superior to the unwashed masses.
10
Dear Paul Constant:
Are you telling us that you believe the government's story of 9/11? And I thought The Stranger was hip, smart and cool!! Maybe all the music and film you promote is garbage too.
Are you telling us that you believe the government's story of 9/11? And I thought The Stranger was hip, smart and cool!! Maybe all the music and film you promote is garbage too.
11
Dear Paul Constant:
Are you telling us that you believe the government's story of 9/11? And I thought The Stranger was hip, smart and cool!! Maybe all the music and film you promote is stupid garbage too. As a former far left progressive, 10 years after 9/11 my only disappointment with Ron Paul is that he is not a 9/11 truther. Way to make a joke of yourself and the Stranger with this article though.
Are you telling us that you believe the government's story of 9/11? And I thought The Stranger was hip, smart and cool!! Maybe all the music and film you promote is stupid garbage too. As a former far left progressive, 10 years after 9/11 my only disappointment with Ron Paul is that he is not a 9/11 truther. Way to make a joke of yourself and the Stranger with this article though.
15
What @2 said.
However, at least Ron Paul doesn't hate America and old people like Comrade Perry does ...
However, at least Ron Paul doesn't hate America and old people like Comrade Perry does ...
17
@9: People are really really good at pattern recognition. To a fault. Good pattern recognition skills are essential to survival. Over-active pattern recognition accounts for much of our desire to see god in everything, or a conspiracy in disparate unrelated information.
22
It would be worth it to do a follow-up article on the psychology of conspiracy theorists. You could almost call it "conspiricism"; it's an affliction worthy of an "ism".
You have somebody who is fairly intelligent but antisocial, and the last thing they want to do is believe what most people believe so they will gravitate towards conspiracy.
You have somebody who is fairly intelligent but antisocial, and the last thing they want to do is believe what most people believe so they will gravitate towards conspiracy.
23
I'm imagining the C4L members as barnyard animals meeting at a pizza place. That makes mess less sad about their mental illness.
25
Paul, on a purely stylistic tangent, shouldn't you have used the word 'liquefy', not 'liquidate'? Or am I just splitting hairs?
28
The Stranger used to be funny. With this article, I'm glad to see the total sarcasm and humor back! Did this first run in the Onion?
I'm a Ron Paul supporter. I don't subscribe to conspiracy theories, therefore I don't believe half the carp that comes out of D.C. Of course, as the author says, I have zero interest in 99% of what comes out of Washington D.C., and there's a simple reason for that. What happens in D.C. can stay in D.C. The politicians there are so grossly out of touch with their constituents that they cannot possibly represent in an appropriate manner.
Ron Paul supports less federal government involvement in the daily lives of Americans, which is good for everyone except the federal government. The federal government is the largest corporation in the world. Do you really want that corporation to be so involved in your life that you are 100% beholden to the out-of-touch, corporate-owned politicians for everything ranging from health, work, taxes and retirement, to sexual preference freedom, marriage rights, and everything in between? If you answered, 'Yes', stick with that 2-party system candidate who promises the world and delivers a rancid peanut.
I'm a Ron Paul supporter. I don't subscribe to conspiracy theories, therefore I don't believe half the carp that comes out of D.C. Of course, as the author says, I have zero interest in 99% of what comes out of Washington D.C., and there's a simple reason for that. What happens in D.C. can stay in D.C. The politicians there are so grossly out of touch with their constituents that they cannot possibly represent in an appropriate manner.
Ron Paul supports less federal government involvement in the daily lives of Americans, which is good for everyone except the federal government. The federal government is the largest corporation in the world. Do you really want that corporation to be so involved in your life that you are 100% beholden to the out-of-touch, corporate-owned politicians for everything ranging from health, work, taxes and retirement, to sexual preference freedom, marriage rights, and everything in between? If you answered, 'Yes', stick with that 2-party system candidate who promises the world and delivers a rancid peanut.
29
P.S. If even for a second, you thought, 'No,' do a little Ron Paul reading to get some real facts instead of the one-sided satire here.
30
The greatest 9-11 conspiracy theory of all in only 5 minutes!:http://www.corbettreport.com/911-a-consp…
Didn't we do this already a couple weeks back?
Didn't we do this already a couple weeks back?
33
"So what kind of person becomes an avid Ron Paul follower? The kind of person who is a 9/11 Truther."
Well said, Paulie and company. By the very same reason neocon swine like Paulie subscribe to those hardcare anti-truthers (and also, I believe Zionists) like Jonathan Kay, fellow with the Foundation in Defense of Democracy, that ultra-neocon blather group which replaced the PNAC crowd (note the similarity in many of the names).
http://www.defenddemocracy.org/about-fdd…
Bill Kristol, Joe Lieberman, Eric Cantor, Gary Bauer, Woolsey, Ledeen, Steve Forbes, Charles Krauthammer, et al., definitely Paul Constant's kind of crowd??
http://www.defenddemocracy.org/about-fdd…
http://www.defenddemocracy.org/about-fdd…
Since it's guilt by association, the typical ploy used by non-reporters, non-writers, and former book clerk hacks who can never make it at anything requiring rigorous thought, this must definitely apply to Paul, Dano and company at the Stranger....Strangest???
No, I would never support Ron Paul, as anyone over the age of 25 who is a libertarian is complete moron. (Should have outgrown it by that age.)
And since I've held the highest security clearances possible, and have experience in military intelligence (sic), global command post ops, and special ops (at least now it comes under that rubric), I and others with similar experience have long since taken issue with the story Paulie believes: the Cheney/Rumsfeld/Bush/Kissinger version.
But for those with a three-digit IQ (unlike Constant's barely two-digit brain), who are capable of independent thought, feel free to peruse the following:
[Vids]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuC_4mGTs…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=WC9KZ2Yy5g4&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pla…
http://soundprint.org:8080/ramgen/docume…
[Articles]
http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2011…
http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/5036…
http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/%3F…
[SEC]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pla…
More...
Well said, Paulie and company. By the very same reason neocon swine like Paulie subscribe to those hardcare anti-truthers (and also, I believe Zionists) like Jonathan Kay, fellow with the Foundation in Defense of Democracy, that ultra-neocon blather group which replaced the PNAC crowd (note the similarity in many of the names).
http://www.defenddemocracy.org/about-fdd…
Bill Kristol, Joe Lieberman, Eric Cantor, Gary Bauer, Woolsey, Ledeen, Steve Forbes, Charles Krauthammer, et al., definitely Paul Constant's kind of crowd??
http://www.defenddemocracy.org/about-fdd…
http://www.defenddemocracy.org/about-fdd…
Since it's guilt by association, the typical ploy used by non-reporters, non-writers, and former book clerk hacks who can never make it at anything requiring rigorous thought, this must definitely apply to Paul, Dano and company at the Stranger....Strangest???
No, I would never support Ron Paul, as anyone over the age of 25 who is a libertarian is complete moron. (Should have outgrown it by that age.)
And since I've held the highest security clearances possible, and have experience in military intelligence (sic), global command post ops, and special ops (at least now it comes under that rubric), I and others with similar experience have long since taken issue with the story Paulie believes: the Cheney/Rumsfeld/Bush/Kissinger version.
But for those with a three-digit IQ (unlike Constant's barely two-digit brain), who are capable of independent thought, feel free to peruse the following:
[Vids]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuC_4mGTs…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=WC9KZ2Yy5g4&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pla…
http://soundprint.org:8080/ramgen/docume…
[Articles]
http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2011…
http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/5036…
http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/%3F…
[SEC]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pla…
34
@32: With pleasure care bear! Perhaps whipping up some cocktails would be in order as well. In light of the topic at hand I'm thinking maybe something Kool-aid based....
35
FYI: Jonathan Kay wrote Among the Truthers, an anti-diatribe against those who question the official Cheney/Rumsfeld/Bush/Kissinger 9/11 story, and associating all those skeptical people with every crazy out there, similary as his pal, neocon Paul Constant does.
Birds of a feather.......
Birds of a feather.......
37
"In a world under assault by shadowy cabinets of scary foreigners seeking to enslave the masses in concentration camps"
i get it, this Ron Paul article is part of a new Disney graphic novel, complete with WWII metaphors!
i get it, this Ron Paul article is part of a new Disney graphic novel, complete with WWII metaphors!
38
@11, 911Hipster, , you are sooo on target!
A friend of mine, after Paul Constant was hired by The Stranger (BTW, whoever was responsible for hiring that eff-tard? Did Dan "let's invade Iraq" Savage have anything to do with it????), recalled his unfortunate experience with Constant when Paulie was a super-incompetent at Elliott Bay Book Company.
Constant claimed he was in charge of their SF section and was knowledgeable about and asked if he could help him.
My friend inquired as to when they would be getting the next copy of an Iain Banks' SF novel in, and Constant claimed that Elliott was the first book store to stock it and had been doing so for over one year.
My friend explained that many local book stores had been stocking both Iain Banks' SF and regular fiction for well over 10 years, and that the first to carry him was the UW Book Store.
Similary, Constant knew nothing about the SF category in general, or anything in particular.
Why Constant felt the need to dissemble is anyone's guess, but almost everying else he has commented on has been off-the-wall and slapdash....
A friend of mine, after Paul Constant was hired by The Stranger (BTW, whoever was responsible for hiring that eff-tard? Did Dan "let's invade Iraq" Savage have anything to do with it????), recalled his unfortunate experience with Constant when Paulie was a super-incompetent at Elliott Bay Book Company.
Constant claimed he was in charge of their SF section and was knowledgeable about and asked if he could help him.
My friend inquired as to when they would be getting the next copy of an Iain Banks' SF novel in, and Constant claimed that Elliott was the first book store to stock it and had been doing so for over one year.
My friend explained that many local book stores had been stocking both Iain Banks' SF and regular fiction for well over 10 years, and that the first to carry him was the UW Book Store.
Similary, Constant knew nothing about the SF category in general, or anything in particular.
Why Constant felt the need to dissemble is anyone's guess, but almost everying else he has commented on has been off-the-wall and slapdash....
39
@36, Lissa, well since Paulie believes in guilt by association, and assuming you subscribe to Paulie's inane and insipid idiocy, no doubt you align yourself with the anti-truthers such as those neocons at FDD?
Is this your and Paulie's best buddy???
http://www.whodidit.org/richardperle_2.j…
Is this your and Paulie's best buddy???
http://www.whodidit.org/richardperle_2.j…
40
@39: Oh, sgt, you're such a caution! Carry on, carry on...
::considers splurging and adding real butter to her popcorn...::
::considers splurging and adding real butter to her popcorn...::
45
Q: What is the difference between a Paultard and a LaRouchie?
That's not the set up for a joke, I'm just wondering if anyone can see any discernible difference between the two.
That's not the set up for a joke, I'm just wondering if anyone can see any discernible difference between the two.
46
There is no conspiracy theory that cannot be equally well explained by simple human idiocy. Either on the part of the supposed conspirators, or on the part of the conspiracy theorists. At the root of all evils, you will find a twerp.
47
@9 my point is that these people CARE and good for them. I would sooner jump on a bed of nails WHILE receiving a root canal than vote for ron paul but I don't believe every ron paul supporter is insane and believes in chemtrails. People look to Ron because he at least appears to be an independent voice that fights for the little guy. I personally think its a crime he has received the attention he gets while dennis kucinich or any other progressive liberal is tossed to the side. The stranger isn't a dennis fan either, which I bitched about the last time they ran an article about him. imo this article takes the easy cynical road instead of offering actual solutions and making a point to relates to actual people, and thats sad to me. shame on me for thinking they represented the little guy.
51
Even Schizophrenics have moments of clarity but I still wouldn't put them in charge of the local nuke power plant.
52
@45: LaRouchies are an actual cult where the members often live together in dorms and LaRouche dictates what sort of music and art and math is acceptable.
Paultards are a mishmash of tech nerds and survivalists and neo-nazis.
Paultards are a mishmash of tech nerds and survivalists and neo-nazis.
53
Well, it's nice that the crazy middle-aged women have a social outlet that doesn't involve a library or Metro. It was lonely for them after the telephone company closed their payment lobbies.
54
Crazy Federal Reserve hating, 9-11 truthing, Ron Paul supporters! They're crazy! And "chemtrails"....oh boy, that's coo coo! Nobody in government could ever come up with something that wild....oh, wait....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXZhyf57Xyc&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PLD570EFB6C8843077
55
@54 Well bud, since the existence of anthropogenic global warming is a known fact, then we already have a real world example of unintended geo-engineering. It's clearly a possible thing to do. Unlike your insane 9/11 conspiracies, which, unlike the study of anthropogenic global warming, are utterly unaccepted in the scientific community. But here's some new stuff for ya, seen this one yet? It's a new theory of what brought down the towers, but the weird thing is is all it requires is chemistry, not conspiracy. Have fun hunting for clues of the conspiracy regardless.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/09/21/di…
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/09/21/di…
56
@55 Yes I have seen that, unfortunately I am one of the few 'truthers' who has never been a big proponent of the 'controlled demolition' angle.
The real story behind 9-11 can't be reduced down to a snappy sentence about nano-thermite, or bombs planted in the buildings. Plus, that line of reasoning misses a critical component for any objective investigation: a suspect, means, and motive.
There's plenty of people (yes, people within the scientific community http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=…) and even people right here on the slog who will argue the minutiae of the physical evidence to death. I think some of it's valid, but most of it is largely irrelevant to holding anyone accountable for the event that has trigger a war which "will not end in our lifetime".
I find things like this vastly more interesting: http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww…
or: http://www.historycommons.org/project.js… (that one might take a while to go through...)
Enough, I'm done. I'm tired of 9-11. It's significance is being vastly overshadowed by the shit storm that we are all currently ankle deep in. A shit storm by the way, that was in-part allowed to happen because too many people have failed to learn the lessons of 9-11, or how truly corrupt elements within our government really are. You can guarantee it's going to get a whole lot worse, I hope you have a kayak.
The real story behind 9-11 can't be reduced down to a snappy sentence about nano-thermite, or bombs planted in the buildings. Plus, that line of reasoning misses a critical component for any objective investigation: a suspect, means, and motive.
There's plenty of people (yes, people within the scientific community http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=…) and even people right here on the slog who will argue the minutiae of the physical evidence to death. I think some of it's valid, but most of it is largely irrelevant to holding anyone accountable for the event that has trigger a war which "will not end in our lifetime".
I find things like this vastly more interesting: http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww…
or: http://www.historycommons.org/project.js… (that one might take a while to go through...)
Enough, I'm done. I'm tired of 9-11. It's significance is being vastly overshadowed by the shit storm that we are all currently ankle deep in. A shit storm by the way, that was in-part allowed to happen because too many people have failed to learn the lessons of 9-11, or how truly corrupt elements within our government really are. You can guarantee it's going to get a whole lot worse, I hope you have a kayak.
57
So I googled Hurricane Erin and 9/11. There's a woman named Judy Wood who has a WTC conspiracy theory that involves Tesla coils and "star energy weapons." Her theories are nuts, of course, but she does have a charming smile.
58
And you need to understand that Richard Gage and his theories are not respected at all outside of the Truther community. You can find "a" scientist to support anything, there's hundreds of thousands of scientists in the world and all individual scientists are fallible humans. We do our best to correct for this with the peer review process, and independent duplication and verification of findings. There's a handful of doctors who support homeopathy, astronomers who believe in UFO abductions, zoologists who believe in Big Foot. They're still wrong. A rational person provisionally sides with the consensus the scientific community holds on a given topic, not someone's pet, routinely debunked idea they've been peddling for years. A handful of cranks doesn't legitimize anything.
60
Only 59 comments? C'mon Paulites/Truthers! You can do better than that! Where is KittenK to chide us for being mean? Where is Anastasia B? What about all of you who respect Mr. Paul for his "sincerity"? I have a pitcher of martinis, and it’s not going to drink itself people!
@59:Would you prefer peanut or plain?
@59:Would you prefer peanut or plain?
61
Anyone who believes World Trade Center 7 fell because an airplane hit it is certifiably insane. If WTC 7 had remained standing, I wouldn't have an issue.
And before you throw out the old "but a chunk was taken out of a corner of the building"...which is true... But if that was the cause, then the building would have fallen toward that damage rather than straight down. Also, NIST admitted that the building was in free-fall for a few seconds. Now, how does a building achieve free-fall unless every support was gone at the same time?
Until someone can explain why WTC 7 fell the way it did, I will continue to take the official government story of 9/11 with a grain of salt.
And before you throw out the old "but a chunk was taken out of a corner of the building"...which is true... But if that was the cause, then the building would have fallen toward that damage rather than straight down. Also, NIST admitted that the building was in free-fall for a few seconds. Now, how does a building achieve free-fall unless every support was gone at the same time?
Until someone can explain why WTC 7 fell the way it did, I will continue to take the official government story of 9/11 with a grain of salt.
62
"someone announces that a local anarchist group wanted to engage the C4L in a debate, which elicits derisive laughter from the assembly. "We don't have time for this," someone sneers."
How embarrassing for C4L Seattle.
How embarrassing for C4L Seattle.
63
@56: "The real story behind 9-11 can't be reduced down to a snappy sentence about nano-thermite, or bombs planted in the buildings. Plus, that line of reasoning misses a critical component for any objective investigation: a suspect, means, and motive."
While slightly better, you're still using a Creationist's logic to "prove" your viewpoint.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_…
While slightly better, you're still using a Creationist's logic to "prove" your viewpoint.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_…
64
@58 A rational person should probably be wondering why all those main-line scientists over at NIST classified the data that they used for their model of WTC7′s collapse. Ya think?
http://cryptome.org/nist070709.pdf
http://cryptome.org/nist070709.pdf
66
@60 Lissa: I love BOTH!!! Chocoholics unite!!!!
@61 Joe6Pack: Also, the World Trade Center collapsed because of a weak foundation. The beams holding up all those floors were not sturdily built. My father was an architectural designer and had pointed this out to me.
@64 Spindies: I wonder if it's possible that the NIST scientists kept the World Trade Center data under wraps because they knew of the weak floor plan?
@61 Joe6Pack: Also, the World Trade Center collapsed because of a weak foundation. The beams holding up all those floors were not sturdily built. My father was an architectural designer and had pointed this out to me.
@64 Spindies: I wonder if it's possible that the NIST scientists kept the World Trade Center data under wraps because they knew of the weak floor plan?
67
@66 NIST's claim is that it would "jeopardize public safety" to let anyone know how their model worked.
68
The only reason the stranger is finally writng a real political hit piece is to discredit Dr. Ron Paul. They are taking the same stance with all the media cronies. Ron Paul has won all his debates according to web polls, only to be minimized through the corporate brain washing media. Seattlites, especially the stranger, claim to be so politically saavy, but do not know anything about the true workings of the federal reserve, real reasons that the US goes to wars, the constitution (our true rights and privlidges),and the true role of government. It is amazing, moreover pathetic, that the anti-war movement has virtually disappeared, now that a democrat is in office. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss!!!
69
9/11 Commissioners admit that they never got to the bottom of 9/11. For example:
• 9/11 Commission co-chair Lee Hamilton says “I don’t believe for a minute we got everything right”, that the Commission was set up to fail, that people should keep asking questions about 9/11, and that the 9/11 debate should continue
• 9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said that “There are ample reasons to suspect that there may be some alternative to what we outlined in our version . . . We didn’t have access . . . .” He also says thatit might take “a permanent 9/11 commission” to end the remaining mysteries of September 11
Indeed, 9/11 Commissioners and other officials say that the true facts were hidden from them, or covered up (you don’t have to get bogged down in reading this section – you can skip ahead to the next, if you like; this is just documenting that the 9/11 Commission report is in no way the last word on 9/11):
• The 9/11 Commission’s co-chairs said that the 9/11 Commissioners knew that military officialsmisrepresented the facts to the Commission, and the Commission considered recommending criminal charges for such false statements (free subscription required)
• 9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer said “We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting”
• 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating: “It is a national scandal”;“This investigation is now compromised”; and “One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up”
• The Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (John Farmer) – who led the 9/11 staff’s inquiry – recently said “At some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened“. He also said “I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years…. This is not spin. This is not true.” And he said: “It’s almost a culture of concealment, for lack of a better word. There were interviews made at the FAA’s New York center the night of 9/11 and those tapes were destroyed. The CIA tapes of the interrogations were destroyed. The story of 9/11 itself, to put it mildly, was distorted and was completely different from the way things happened”
• A 27-year CIA veteran, who chaired National Intelligence Estimates and personally delivered intelligence briefings to Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, their Vice Presidents, Secretaries of State, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and many other senior government officials, and who has for years been a tireless anti-war advocate and critic of imperial foreign policy (Raymond McGovern) said “I think at simplest terms, there’s a cover-up. The 9/11 Report is a joke”
• A 29-year CIA veteran, former National Intelligence Officer (NIO) and former Director of the CIA’s Office of Regional and Political Analysis (William Bill Christison) said “I now think there is persuasive evidence that the events of September did not unfold as the Bush administration and the 9/11 Commission would have us believe (and see this)
• A number of intelligence officials, including a CIA Operations Officer who co-chaired a CIA multi-agency task force coordinating intelligence efforts among many intelligence and law enforcement agencies (Lynne Larkin) sent a joint letter to Congress expressing their concerns about “serious shortcomings,” “omissions,” and “major flaws” in the 9/11 Commission Report and offering their services for a new investigation (they were ignored)
• A decorated 20-year CIA veteran, who Pulitzer-Prize winning investigative reporter Seymour Hersh called “perhaps the best on-the-ground field officer in the Middle East”, and whose astounding career formed the script for the Academy Award winning motion picture Syriana (Robert Baer) said that“the evidence points at” 9/11 having had aspects of being an inside job
• The Division Chief of the CIA’s Office of Soviet Affairs, who served as Senior Analyst from 1966 – 1990. He also served as Professor of International Security at the National War College from 1986 – 2004 (Melvin Goodman) said “The final [9/11 Commission] report is ultimately a coverup”
• According to the Co-Chair of the Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 and former Head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Bob Graham, an FBI informant had hosted and rented a room to two hijackers in 2000 and that, when the Inquiry sought to interview the informant, the FBI refused outright, and then hid him in an unknown location, and that a high-level FBI official stated these blocking maneuvers were undertaken under orders from the White House (confirmed here)
• Congressman Ron Paul calls for a new 9/11 investigation and states that “we see the [9/11] investigations that have been done so far as more or less cover-up and no real explanation of what went on”
• Congressman Dennis Kucinich hints that we aren’t being told the truth about 9/11
• Congressman Jason Chafetz says that we need to be vigilant and continue to investigate 9/11
• Senator Lincoln Chaffee endorses a new 9/11 investigation
• Congressman Dan Hamburg doesn’t believe the official version of events
• Congressman and senior member of the House Armed Services Committee, and who served six years as the Chairman of the Military Research and Development Subcommittee Curt Weldon has shown that the U.S. tracked hijackers before 9/11, is open to hearing information about explosives in the Twin Towers, and is open to the possibility that 9something very different from the Bush-Cheney version of events occurred on 9/11
• U.S. General, Commanding General of U.S. European Command and Supreme Allied Commander Europe, decorated with the Bronze Star, Silver Star, and Purple Heart (General Wesley Clark) said“We’ve never finished the investigation of 9/11 and whether the administration actually misused the intelligence information it had. The evidence seems pretty clear to me. I’ve seen that for a long time”
• Former Deputy Secretary for Intelligence and Warning under Nixon, Ford, and Carter (Morton Goulder), former Deputy Director to the White House Task Force on Terrorism (Edward L. Peck), and former US Department of State Foreign Service Officer (J. Michael Springmann), as well as a who’s who of liberals and independents) jointly call for a new investigation into 9/11
• Former Federal Prosecutor, Office of Special Investigations, U.S. Department of Justice under Presidents Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan; former U.S. Army Intelligence officer, and currently a widely-sought media commentator on terrorism and intelligence services (John Loftus) says “The information provided by European intelligence services prior to 9/11 was so extensive that it is no longer possible for either the CIA or FBI to assert a defense of incompetence”
• The Group Director on matters of national security in the U.S. Government Accountability Office said that President Bush did not respond to unprecedented warnings of the 9/11 disaster and conducted amassive cover-up instead of accepting responsibility
• Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense under President Ronald Reagan (Col. Ronald D. Ray) said thatthe official story of 9/11 is “the dog that doesn’t hunt”
• Several key employees for the defense department say that the government covered up their testimony about tracking Mohammed Atta before 9/11
• The former director of the FBI (Louis Freeh) says there was a cover up by the 9/11 Commission
High-Level Officials Want to Explain 9/11 … But Are Being Gagged
There are high-level officials who can tell us why 9/11 happened … but they are being ignored or gagged.
As Senator Patrick Leahy said that Congress doesn’t want to know what happened:
The two questions that the congress will not ask . . . is why did 9/11 happen on George Bush’s watch when he had clear warnings that it was going to happen? Why did they allow it to happen?
And the people who can explain what happened are being gagged.
FBI Translator – “The Most Gagged Person” In History
For example, former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds – President of the National Security Whistleblower Coalition – who has been deemed credible by the Department of Justice’s Inspector General, several senators (free subscription required), and a coalition of prominent conservative and liberal groups – has fought for years to testify about what she knows about 9/11, and has repeatedly asked to be subpoenaed (so as to avoid violation of her oath of secrecy as a government employee).
The ACLU described Edmonds as:
The most gagged person in the history of the United States of America.
And famed Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg says that Edmonds possesses information “far more explosive than the Pentagon Papers”.
Not a single politicians or prosecutor has been willing to issue a subpoena.
Edmonds also made the following offer:
If anyone of the major networks — ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, FOX — promise to air the entire segment, without editing, I promise to tell them everything that I know,” about everything mentioned above, she told us.
“I can tell the American public exactly what it is, and what it is that they are covering up,” she continued. “I’m not compromising ongoing investigations,” Edmonds explained, because “they’ve all been shut down since.”
Not a single major network has let Edmonds say what she knows.
Indeed, Ellsberg says that the government has ordered the media not to touch Edmonds:
Ellsberg seemed hardly surprised that today’s American mainstream broadcast media has so far failed to take [former FBI translator and 9/11 whistleblower Sibel] Edmonds up on her offer, despite the blockbuster nature of her allegations.
As Edmonds has also alluded, Ellsberg pointed to the New York Times, who “sat on the NSA spying story for over a year” when they “could have put it out before the 2004 election, which might have changed the outcome.”
“There will be phone calls going out to the media saying ‘don’t even think of touching it, you will be prosecuted for violating national security,’” he told us.
* * *
“I am confident that there is conversation inside the Government as to ‘How do we deal with Sibel?’” contends Ellsberg. “The first line of defense is to ensure that she doesn’t get into the media. I think any outlet that thought of using her materials would go to to the government and they would be told ‘don’t touch this . . . .‘”
Other Whistleblowers Being Silenced
Edmonds also says that she has been contacted by two high-ranking military officers who would like to shed light on 9/11, but – due to their oaths of secrecy – can only do so if subpoenaed. No one in Washington wants to issue a subpoena.
High-Level Military Intelligence Officer: No One In Washington Wants To Know
Similarly, a high-level military intelligence officer says that his unit – tasked with tracking Bin Laden prior to 9/11 – was pulled off the task, and there warnings that the World Trade Center and Pentagon were being targeted were ignored.
Moreover, he says that he has information that can shed light on 9/11, and that he has repeatedly tried to get this information to the Obama administration and Congress, but that no one in the administration or Congress wants to hear about it. As just one example, Nancy Pelosi’s office demanded that he not even email any information which he has about 9/11.
He is still working in military intelligence, and so he can only publicly speak about 9/11 if he is subpoenaed. He is therefore asking that he be subpoenaed … but no one wants to look into it:
There are numerous other whistleblowers with key information about 9/11. But no one in the government or media wants to hear what they know.
9/11 was one of the most important events in American history, as 10 years of war in numerous countries – costing trillions of dollars – and the crackdown on liberties like freedom of speech have all been justified by that one event. And yet the politicians in D.C. and the corporate media don’t want to hear from the people who can explain the gross incompetence (or worse) which occurred on that day.
More...
• 9/11 Commission co-chair Lee Hamilton says “I don’t believe for a minute we got everything right”, that the Commission was set up to fail, that people should keep asking questions about 9/11, and that the 9/11 debate should continue
• 9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said that “There are ample reasons to suspect that there may be some alternative to what we outlined in our version . . . We didn’t have access . . . .” He also says thatit might take “a permanent 9/11 commission” to end the remaining mysteries of September 11
Indeed, 9/11 Commissioners and other officials say that the true facts were hidden from them, or covered up (you don’t have to get bogged down in reading this section – you can skip ahead to the next, if you like; this is just documenting that the 9/11 Commission report is in no way the last word on 9/11):
• The 9/11 Commission’s co-chairs said that the 9/11 Commissioners knew that military officialsmisrepresented the facts to the Commission, and the Commission considered recommending criminal charges for such false statements (free subscription required)
• 9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer said “We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting”
• 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating: “It is a national scandal”;“This investigation is now compromised”; and “One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up”
• The Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (John Farmer) – who led the 9/11 staff’s inquiry – recently said “At some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened“. He also said “I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years…. This is not spin. This is not true.” And he said: “It’s almost a culture of concealment, for lack of a better word. There were interviews made at the FAA’s New York center the night of 9/11 and those tapes were destroyed. The CIA tapes of the interrogations were destroyed. The story of 9/11 itself, to put it mildly, was distorted and was completely different from the way things happened”
• A 27-year CIA veteran, who chaired National Intelligence Estimates and personally delivered intelligence briefings to Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, their Vice Presidents, Secretaries of State, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and many other senior government officials, and who has for years been a tireless anti-war advocate and critic of imperial foreign policy (Raymond McGovern) said “I think at simplest terms, there’s a cover-up. The 9/11 Report is a joke”
• A 29-year CIA veteran, former National Intelligence Officer (NIO) and former Director of the CIA’s Office of Regional and Political Analysis (William Bill Christison) said “I now think there is persuasive evidence that the events of September did not unfold as the Bush administration and the 9/11 Commission would have us believe (and see this)
• A number of intelligence officials, including a CIA Operations Officer who co-chaired a CIA multi-agency task force coordinating intelligence efforts among many intelligence and law enforcement agencies (Lynne Larkin) sent a joint letter to Congress expressing their concerns about “serious shortcomings,” “omissions,” and “major flaws” in the 9/11 Commission Report and offering their services for a new investigation (they were ignored)
• A decorated 20-year CIA veteran, who Pulitzer-Prize winning investigative reporter Seymour Hersh called “perhaps the best on-the-ground field officer in the Middle East”, and whose astounding career formed the script for the Academy Award winning motion picture Syriana (Robert Baer) said that“the evidence points at” 9/11 having had aspects of being an inside job
• The Division Chief of the CIA’s Office of Soviet Affairs, who served as Senior Analyst from 1966 – 1990. He also served as Professor of International Security at the National War College from 1986 – 2004 (Melvin Goodman) said “The final [9/11 Commission] report is ultimately a coverup”
• According to the Co-Chair of the Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 and former Head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Bob Graham, an FBI informant had hosted and rented a room to two hijackers in 2000 and that, when the Inquiry sought to interview the informant, the FBI refused outright, and then hid him in an unknown location, and that a high-level FBI official stated these blocking maneuvers were undertaken under orders from the White House (confirmed here)
• Congressman Ron Paul calls for a new 9/11 investigation and states that “we see the [9/11] investigations that have been done so far as more or less cover-up and no real explanation of what went on”
• Congressman Dennis Kucinich hints that we aren’t being told the truth about 9/11
• Congressman Jason Chafetz says that we need to be vigilant and continue to investigate 9/11
• Senator Lincoln Chaffee endorses a new 9/11 investigation
• Congressman Dan Hamburg doesn’t believe the official version of events
• Congressman and senior member of the House Armed Services Committee, and who served six years as the Chairman of the Military Research and Development Subcommittee Curt Weldon has shown that the U.S. tracked hijackers before 9/11, is open to hearing information about explosives in the Twin Towers, and is open to the possibility that 9something very different from the Bush-Cheney version of events occurred on 9/11
• U.S. General, Commanding General of U.S. European Command and Supreme Allied Commander Europe, decorated with the Bronze Star, Silver Star, and Purple Heart (General Wesley Clark) said“We’ve never finished the investigation of 9/11 and whether the administration actually misused the intelligence information it had. The evidence seems pretty clear to me. I’ve seen that for a long time”
• Former Deputy Secretary for Intelligence and Warning under Nixon, Ford, and Carter (Morton Goulder), former Deputy Director to the White House Task Force on Terrorism (Edward L. Peck), and former US Department of State Foreign Service Officer (J. Michael Springmann), as well as a who’s who of liberals and independents) jointly call for a new investigation into 9/11
• Former Federal Prosecutor, Office of Special Investigations, U.S. Department of Justice under Presidents Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan; former U.S. Army Intelligence officer, and currently a widely-sought media commentator on terrorism and intelligence services (John Loftus) says “The information provided by European intelligence services prior to 9/11 was so extensive that it is no longer possible for either the CIA or FBI to assert a defense of incompetence”
• The Group Director on matters of national security in the U.S. Government Accountability Office said that President Bush did not respond to unprecedented warnings of the 9/11 disaster and conducted amassive cover-up instead of accepting responsibility
• Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense under President Ronald Reagan (Col. Ronald D. Ray) said thatthe official story of 9/11 is “the dog that doesn’t hunt”
• Several key employees for the defense department say that the government covered up their testimony about tracking Mohammed Atta before 9/11
• The former director of the FBI (Louis Freeh) says there was a cover up by the 9/11 Commission
High-Level Officials Want to Explain 9/11 … But Are Being Gagged
There are high-level officials who can tell us why 9/11 happened … but they are being ignored or gagged.
As Senator Patrick Leahy said that Congress doesn’t want to know what happened:
The two questions that the congress will not ask . . . is why did 9/11 happen on George Bush’s watch when he had clear warnings that it was going to happen? Why did they allow it to happen?
And the people who can explain what happened are being gagged.
FBI Translator – “The Most Gagged Person” In History
For example, former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds – President of the National Security Whistleblower Coalition – who has been deemed credible by the Department of Justice’s Inspector General, several senators (free subscription required), and a coalition of prominent conservative and liberal groups – has fought for years to testify about what she knows about 9/11, and has repeatedly asked to be subpoenaed (so as to avoid violation of her oath of secrecy as a government employee).
The ACLU described Edmonds as:
The most gagged person in the history of the United States of America.
And famed Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg says that Edmonds possesses information “far more explosive than the Pentagon Papers”.
Not a single politicians or prosecutor has been willing to issue a subpoena.
Edmonds also made the following offer:
If anyone of the major networks — ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, FOX — promise to air the entire segment, without editing, I promise to tell them everything that I know,” about everything mentioned above, she told us.
“I can tell the American public exactly what it is, and what it is that they are covering up,” she continued. “I’m not compromising ongoing investigations,” Edmonds explained, because “they’ve all been shut down since.”
Not a single major network has let Edmonds say what she knows.
Indeed, Ellsberg says that the government has ordered the media not to touch Edmonds:
Ellsberg seemed hardly surprised that today’s American mainstream broadcast media has so far failed to take [former FBI translator and 9/11 whistleblower Sibel] Edmonds up on her offer, despite the blockbuster nature of her allegations.
As Edmonds has also alluded, Ellsberg pointed to the New York Times, who “sat on the NSA spying story for over a year” when they “could have put it out before the 2004 election, which might have changed the outcome.”
“There will be phone calls going out to the media saying ‘don’t even think of touching it, you will be prosecuted for violating national security,’” he told us.
* * *
“I am confident that there is conversation inside the Government as to ‘How do we deal with Sibel?’” contends Ellsberg. “The first line of defense is to ensure that she doesn’t get into the media. I think any outlet that thought of using her materials would go to to the government and they would be told ‘don’t touch this . . . .‘”
Other Whistleblowers Being Silenced
Edmonds also says that she has been contacted by two high-ranking military officers who would like to shed light on 9/11, but – due to their oaths of secrecy – can only do so if subpoenaed. No one in Washington wants to issue a subpoena.
High-Level Military Intelligence Officer: No One In Washington Wants To Know
Similarly, a high-level military intelligence officer says that his unit – tasked with tracking Bin Laden prior to 9/11 – was pulled off the task, and there warnings that the World Trade Center and Pentagon were being targeted were ignored.
Moreover, he says that he has information that can shed light on 9/11, and that he has repeatedly tried to get this information to the Obama administration and Congress, but that no one in the administration or Congress wants to hear about it. As just one example, Nancy Pelosi’s office demanded that he not even email any information which he has about 9/11.
He is still working in military intelligence, and so he can only publicly speak about 9/11 if he is subpoenaed. He is therefore asking that he be subpoenaed … but no one wants to look into it:
There are numerous other whistleblowers with key information about 9/11. But no one in the government or media wants to hear what they know.
9/11 was one of the most important events in American history, as 10 years of war in numerous countries – costing trillions of dollars – and the crackdown on liberties like freedom of speech have all been justified by that one event. And yet the politicians in D.C. and the corporate media don’t want to hear from the people who can explain the gross incompetence (or worse) which occurred on that day.
70
@55, OuterCowDung,
Here's a simple exercise (which actually requires mental activity, so it may be a bit beyond you): simply research into the backgrounds of the passengers aboard those four airliners that day, which leads to...
@57, Joe GlibMoron,
You might then learn that among three unique groups and three unique people aboard those airliners, included a physicist with the Naval Surface Weapons Center, Directed Energy Section (sound familiar with what you Googled, dood???) who was familiar with a Strategic Defense Initiative ("Star Wars") intel ploy to mislead the old Sovs by pre-planted pressure charges in a dummy building then overflying with an airborne "explosive laser" which really did no such thing, simply altered the barometric pressure in the building -- with directed energy -- thus setting off the pressure charges.
Here's a simple exercise (which actually requires mental activity, so it may be a bit beyond you): simply research into the backgrounds of the passengers aboard those four airliners that day, which leads to...
@57, Joe GlibMoron,
You might then learn that among three unique groups and three unique people aboard those airliners, included a physicist with the Naval Surface Weapons Center, Directed Energy Section (sound familiar with what you Googled, dood???) who was familiar with a Strategic Defense Initiative ("Star Wars") intel ploy to mislead the old Sovs by pre-planted pressure charges in a dummy building then overflying with an airborne "explosive laser" which really did no such thing, simply altered the barometric pressure in the building -- with directed energy -- thus setting off the pressure charges.
71
#56, spindles, really nails it with:
It's significance is being vastly overshadowed by the shit storm that we are all currently ankle deep in. A shit storm by the way, that was in-part allowed to happen because too many people have failed to learn the lessons of 9-11, or how truly corrupt elements within our government really are. You can guarantee it's going to get a whole lot worse, I hope you have a kayak.
If you lazy-brained types would bother to examine the financial angles, you might actually begin to understand (albeit only a little given your mentally limited situations) the audit trails involved: money transferred offshore, hedge funds explosion, ultra-leveraging based upon securitized credit deratives based upon hedge fund trillions (from transferred funds, etc.), today resulting in a leveraged bought out America.
Of course, this involves an attention span greater than 15 seconds.
But I'm afraid this is where most of the commenters are at:
http://cryptogon.com/wp-content/uploads/…
It's significance is being vastly overshadowed by the shit storm that we are all currently ankle deep in. A shit storm by the way, that was in-part allowed to happen because too many people have failed to learn the lessons of 9-11, or how truly corrupt elements within our government really are. You can guarantee it's going to get a whole lot worse, I hope you have a kayak.
If you lazy-brained types would bother to examine the financial angles, you might actually begin to understand (albeit only a little given your mentally limited situations) the audit trails involved: money transferred offshore, hedge funds explosion, ultra-leveraging based upon securitized credit deratives based upon hedge fund trillions (from transferred funds, etc.), today resulting in a leveraged bought out America.
Of course, this involves an attention span greater than 15 seconds.
But I'm afraid this is where most of the commenters are at:
http://cryptogon.com/wp-content/uploads/…
72
@65: "Wow, well you better not let anyone whose ever tried to prosecuted a crime know that."
What an asinine statement.
Going with it, Bush and the neocons are, as I believe, horrible people. Plenty of prosecutors attempt to place guilt on horrible people for crimes they did not commit (though they are surely guilty of other crimes.)
You're aggreeing with me here far more than you're countering my statement, you realize. Do I believe they're beyond being capable of this? No. Do I believe that they caused this? No.
What an asinine statement.
Going with it, Bush and the neocons are, as I believe, horrible people. Plenty of prosecutors attempt to place guilt on horrible people for crimes they did not commit (though they are surely guilty of other crimes.)
You're aggreeing with me here far more than you're countering my statement, you realize. Do I believe they're beyond being capable of this? No. Do I believe that they caused this? No.
73
@68: "The only reason the stranger is finally writng a real political hit piece is to discredit Dr. Ron Paul.
...
Ron Paul has won all his debates according to web polls"
Yawn.
...
Ron Paul has won all his debates according to web polls"
Yawn.
74
#68: "Yawn"
Typical responce of the truly ignorant. America is being destroyed from within...Yawn
We are fighting another war...Yawn
Elections are stolen..Yawn
No doubt, your brain is asleep...Yawn
Typical responce of the truly ignorant. America is being destroyed from within...Yawn
We are fighting another war...Yawn
Elections are stolen..Yawn
No doubt, your brain is asleep...Yawn
76
Totally, Lissa! Today's a beery, cheery day!
@74: On the contrary. I loathe Paul *and* will take glee in the eventual isms fling of the corporate media.
@74: On the contrary. I loathe Paul *and* will take glee in the eventual isms fling of the corporate media.
78
@75 Lissa: You've still got the martini shaker going? Yeah!!!
You go, girl!!
@56 & @71: You're both chillingly right on!
And now I really do need that drink!
You go, girl!!
@56 & @71: You're both chillingly right on!
And now I really do need that drink!
79
@61 - In addition to the structural damage it sustained from the towers falling, WTC7 was also heavily on fire. This fire burned for 7 hours un-fought, as the building's water main had been damaged and the sprinkler system had insufficient pressure. The FDNY encountered similar problems with local water service, and were never able to get an operation going to fight the WTC7 fire. The fire fully engulfed many, many floors of the building over that 7 hours, and is to this date the largest office fire in history. Eventually the building collapsed due to structural damage caused by this fire, along with the debris damage from the towers collapsing.
80
Paul Constant,
You left out that Ron Paul subscribes to the blowback theory. To Senator Paul, fundamentalist Islamic terrorists are real. They're clearly real to you, too: organized fanatical jihadists w/ their sleeper cells etc. You clearly believe the hype, the same hype that keeps Northrup Grumman in business.
In his book “Defending Mohammad”, Mohammad Salameh’s defense attorney Robert E. Precht, recounts a meeting he had with Bill Kunstler during the 1993 WTC bombing trial. Kunstler offers advice while doing some unvarnished truth-telling:
"If you'll pardon me, you guys are being incredibly naive. The system is terribly corrupt. Just look at the FBI, how they leaked evidence and intimidated that witness Moneeb. How can you talk about giving this guy a fair trial? There's no way he's going to get a fair trial, and you're only going to legitimize the result if you don't push the envelope. Crimes are committed in the name of justice by prosecutors and judges all the time. You should argue that the FBI was behind the bombing and that it was a plot to discredit enemies of U.S. policy in the Middle East."
When Pretcht's co-counsel John Byrnes demurs by saying, "We don't see it as a political case..." Kunstler fires back,
"That's your problem. You don't see the case for what it is. It's a political case. You heard the government's opening statement. The stuff about America not being safe anymore, all those Arab terrorists out to get it. That's what they've turned this case into, not the guilt or innocence of your client. You've got to play hardball."
By pushing the envelope/playing hardball, Kunstler was recommending that Pretcht call as a witness the FBI informant Emad Salem. If you recall, Salem recorded phone calls between himself and his handlers that are quite incriminating w/ respect to the charge that the agency was involved in the plot.
btw, you know who’s a big supporter of the holographic, no planes theory of 9/11? Morgan Reynolds. That's right, the former chief economist of the United States Department of Labor during Bush's first term. Talk about poisoning the well...
More...
You left out that Ron Paul subscribes to the blowback theory. To Senator Paul, fundamentalist Islamic terrorists are real. They're clearly real to you, too: organized fanatical jihadists w/ their sleeper cells etc. You clearly believe the hype, the same hype that keeps Northrup Grumman in business.
In his book “Defending Mohammad”, Mohammad Salameh’s defense attorney Robert E. Precht, recounts a meeting he had with Bill Kunstler during the 1993 WTC bombing trial. Kunstler offers advice while doing some unvarnished truth-telling:
"If you'll pardon me, you guys are being incredibly naive. The system is terribly corrupt. Just look at the FBI, how they leaked evidence and intimidated that witness Moneeb. How can you talk about giving this guy a fair trial? There's no way he's going to get a fair trial, and you're only going to legitimize the result if you don't push the envelope. Crimes are committed in the name of justice by prosecutors and judges all the time. You should argue that the FBI was behind the bombing and that it was a plot to discredit enemies of U.S. policy in the Middle East."
When Pretcht's co-counsel John Byrnes demurs by saying, "We don't see it as a political case..." Kunstler fires back,
"That's your problem. You don't see the case for what it is. It's a political case. You heard the government's opening statement. The stuff about America not being safe anymore, all those Arab terrorists out to get it. That's what they've turned this case into, not the guilt or innocence of your client. You've got to play hardball."
By pushing the envelope/playing hardball, Kunstler was recommending that Pretcht call as a witness the FBI informant Emad Salem. If you recall, Salem recorded phone calls between himself and his handlers that are quite incriminating w/ respect to the charge that the agency was involved in the plot.
btw, you know who’s a big supporter of the holographic, no planes theory of 9/11? Morgan Reynolds. That's right, the former chief economist of the United States Department of Labor during Bush's first term. Talk about poisoning the well...
81
This is interesting how the "liberal" media even believes the official stories the government provides us. Ron Paul questions the mainstream corporate world of which obviously this writer is a slave to. The government has done an excellent job deceiving the masses with their official story of 9/11 and creating outcasts of those of us who do not believe their story. The media has created an equality of "Conspiracy Theorist" with a lunatic ... great job to the entire team of criminals who pulled it off. This is truly a sad society where we are ridiculed for questioning and not believing the government.
82
I call bull****!
I'm not a supporter of Ron Paul, (and there is no chance of him winning) but atleast his policies support his public agenda. Aka, libertarian politician equals libertarian policies. Can you say the same about the "teabaggers"?
My problem here is your complete lack of journalistic sense! You listed one source (The PAC you went to.) and assume those are the only types of Ron Paul supporters in the whole US.
Political action committees aren't a fair representation of support. Because you can have multiple PACs supporting the same candidate for office, but have different viewpoints on different situations.
You list all these things he supports that make him look like a crackpot and don't show where you got those facts. Cite sources! If you don't show where you got the info you're just as bad as those conspiracy bloggers you were ragging on.
You just made fox news look credible!
I'm not a supporter of Ron Paul, (and there is no chance of him winning) but atleast his policies support his public agenda. Aka, libertarian politician equals libertarian policies. Can you say the same about the "teabaggers"?
My problem here is your complete lack of journalistic sense! You listed one source (The PAC you went to.) and assume those are the only types of Ron Paul supporters in the whole US.
Political action committees aren't a fair representation of support. Because you can have multiple PACs supporting the same candidate for office, but have different viewpoints on different situations.
You list all these things he supports that make him look like a crackpot and don't show where you got those facts. Cite sources! If you don't show where you got the info you're just as bad as those conspiracy bloggers you were ragging on.
You just made fox news look credible!
83
I call bullshit!
I'm not a Ron Paul supporter, (and he'll never win) but atleast his policies reflect his public agenda. I.e. libertarian politician equals libertarian policies and values. Can you say the same of the tea party candidates?
You name one source, from the sounds of it a small PAC, and make the assumption that all Ron Paul supporters in the US are conspiracy nuts. One meeting does not give an accurate demographic. Especially, if it is a PAC.
Cite sources! Multiple sources! Aside from the PAC, you cite no names, dates, bills he's passed, bills he's apposed, etc. Instead, you portray him as a crackpot with no real substance to back it up. If you don't show where you got your info you're no better than those conspiracy theory bloggers you were ranting about! Where's your journalistic integrity?
You made fox news look credible with that article...
I'm not a Ron Paul supporter, (and he'll never win) but atleast his policies reflect his public agenda. I.e. libertarian politician equals libertarian policies and values. Can you say the same of the tea party candidates?
You name one source, from the sounds of it a small PAC, and make the assumption that all Ron Paul supporters in the US are conspiracy nuts. One meeting does not give an accurate demographic. Especially, if it is a PAC.
Cite sources! Multiple sources! Aside from the PAC, you cite no names, dates, bills he's passed, bills he's apposed, etc. Instead, you portray him as a crackpot with no real substance to back it up. If you don't show where you got your info you're no better than those conspiracy theory bloggers you were ranting about! Where's your journalistic integrity?
You made fox news look credible with that article...
84
Had the good sense to make popcorn and a nice pitcher of martooners before sitting down to start reading the comments ... and so glad I did! BTW, Lissa, you get first dibs on the pronto pups in the oven for "undead Ayn Rand."
85
It is very clear that Pres. Obobo will be a one-trick pony. His so called followers are obviously not critical-thinking minded, but rather following a cult of personality character and still under the euphoria of the novelty of the first Black president. Let us see his achievements: the failed economy: federal deficit from 11 to 16 trillion (Bush: 9 to 11, 2 terms), the QE thefts, US credit downgrading, crushing unemployment the wall street thefts; the reneged promises: the failure to close Guantanamo bay and the opening of the far worse Camp Bagram, failure to undo and ironically the expansion of Bush’s policies including the Patriot act; Military: undeclared and illegal wars in Pakistan, Libya, expanding Afghanistan, and turning Iraq into a mercenary war, more than 1000 military bases (up from 700+ from Bush) not including the dozens or ???hundreds new drone bases planned for Africa, and attacking by drone no less than a half-dozen countries; scandals: Soldyne and LightSquared that we know. Before you liberals (“ooh my own flatulence smells so sweet”) attack Ron Paul, research of what he says not of what others say of him and try to understand the issues and not the images and five second sound bites from ass clown republicans, democrats, and media.
86
All building demolitions in major cities require permits that are easily found in the public record of state and or municipal government so there would be a public record of
Silverstein Properties' plan to demolish their own buildings in Albany or NYC hall and since there is no record of this that means 9/11 truthers are delusional and the 9/11 Commission Report is the last word and that Ron Paul can't win. Thank you, Paul Constant, you are a real journalist.
Silverstein Properties' plan to demolish their own buildings in Albany or NYC hall and since there is no record of this that means 9/11 truthers are delusional and the 9/11 Commission Report is the last word and that Ron Paul can't win. Thank you, Paul Constant, you are a real journalist.
87
#86 that is like saying there is no drug trafficing in the US because drug dealers must pay taxes and since they don't pay taxes...no drugs
What a marooooooon!!!!!!!
typical Obamite
What a marooooooon!!!!!!!
typical Obamite
88
Wow, I hadn't heard of any of these weather manipulation-related conspiracy theories. The theories that you guys come up with sound more far-fetched and full of holes than the official government version of the story you're trying to debunk.
90
Yeah...this guy is right...Ron Paul is the only candidate who is talking about changing what is going on in Washington.
That is just CRAAAAZY! He is the only candidate that would bring all the troops home on day 1 of his presidency! WACKY!!!
He is the only president who wants to change the way we do banking in America. INSANE! IT'S GOING SO WELL!!!
I'm glad The Stranger is here to tell us that only paranoid whack jobs with ponytails and rumpled coats would vote for him.
His ideas are extreme and crazy. Now, let's vote in the establishment's choice of Obama again or Perry and hope for things to finally change. That's not insane at all, of course!
That is just CRAAAAZY! He is the only candidate that would bring all the troops home on day 1 of his presidency! WACKY!!!
He is the only president who wants to change the way we do banking in America. INSANE! IT'S GOING SO WELL!!!
I'm glad The Stranger is here to tell us that only paranoid whack jobs with ponytails and rumpled coats would vote for him.
His ideas are extreme and crazy. Now, let's vote in the establishment's choice of Obama again or Perry and hope for things to finally change. That's not insane at all, of course!
91
The amount of smugness filling this comment thread is sickening. It's almost as though denying theories of conspiracy and collusion is as hip and cool as the typical stranger reader thinks themselves to be. I find it hilarious that you say that "truthers" or "conspiracy theorists" are delusional and seem to think they know better than you, yet you obviously don't see the irony in believing the official stories and using the same methods of dehumanization that the military and politicians have used for ever: marginalize those who don't think like you or that you must go out and kill by assigning them a group name. Charley, skinnies, conspiracy theorists, sheeple, etc. aren't like "us", the ones in the know... Seriously, your hip, cool, "I know what's going on, and it's exactly what the authorities tell me" is not only sad, it's down right depressing.
92
@82: "I call bull****!
I'm not a supporter of Ron Paul, (and there is no chance of him winning) but atleast his policies support his public agenda. Aka, libertarian politician equals libertarian policies. Can you say the same about the "teabaggers"?"
"He may be insane/naive/calculating, but at least he's not visibly retarded?"
Er, no cookie for Paul. I appreciate that he's fairly ideologically consistent, but he's a fool in other ways (for example, believing that Bachmann sincerely agrees with him and isn't just giving lip service.)
He would/does cave to any Teabagger who pretends to agree with his ideology. They don't, they're opportunists.
I'm not a supporter of Ron Paul, (and there is no chance of him winning) but atleast his policies support his public agenda. Aka, libertarian politician equals libertarian policies. Can you say the same about the "teabaggers"?"
"He may be insane/naive/calculating, but at least he's not visibly retarded?"
Er, no cookie for Paul. I appreciate that he's fairly ideologically consistent, but he's a fool in other ways (for example, believing that Bachmann sincerely agrees with him and isn't just giving lip service.)
He would/does cave to any Teabagger who pretends to agree with his ideology. They don't, they're opportunists.
93
The amount of smugness filling this comment thread is sickening. It's almost as though denying theories of conspiracy and collusion is as hip and cool as the typical stranger reader thinks themselves to be. I find it hilarious that you say that "truthers" or "conspiracy theorists" are delusional and seem to think they know better than you, yet you obviously don't see the irony in believing the official stories and using the same methods of dehumanization that the military and politicians have used for ever: marginalize those who don't think like you or that you must go out and kill by assigning them a group name. Charley, skinnies, conspiracy theorists, sheeple, etc. aren't like "us", the ones in the know... Seriously, your hip, cool, "I know what's going on, and it's exactly what the authorities tell me" is not only sad, it's down right depressing
94
I know this is off topic, but why is Rob McKenna leading Jay Inslee in the polls---especially in King County???
Okay, Lissa--I really DO need that drink!
Okay, Lissa--I really DO need that drink!
95
@84: Yes snacks! More snacks I say!
Indieoak, you sound like you could use one. Low blood sugar may be why you are so grumpy.
Indieoak, you sound like you could use one. Low blood sugar may be why you are so grumpy.
96
I honestly don't know what to believe about 9/11. However, whenever I look at the video of the building falling, I always wonder how clean the decent is. Now, does one become a paranoid schizophrenic for just being curious?
97
What a delicious brew of insanity and nutty fun! I hope that it isn't over. They haven't even gotten to the part where all the peanuts on the flights where changed out for pretzels, and we all know what that means...
98
There's a lot of food and drink being passed around in this thread, and I would like some, please.
@38: Your "friend" is wrong. The bookseller in that Banks anecdote is not me. I know who he's talking about, but it ain't me. That's the only one of your comments I feel like addressing right now.
@38: Your "friend" is wrong. The bookseller in that Banks anecdote is not me. I know who he's talking about, but it ain't me. That's the only one of your comments I feel like addressing right now.
99
@95: Right on, Lissa!! I second that on more snacks!!
@97: Yeah---I want my honey roasted peanuts!!!
@97: Yeah---I want my honey roasted peanuts!!!
102
@100: OooOOoo Nachos!
Paul would you like to share my nachos? I can tell you all about the time I saw you at Twice Told Tales once but was too shy to speak to you…
::blushes, runs to replenish the rum punch::
Paul would you like to share my nachos? I can tell you all about the time I saw you at Twice Told Tales once but was too shy to speak to you…
::blushes, runs to replenish the rum punch::
103
@96: "Now, does one become a paranoid schizophrenic for just being curious?"
Asking questions doesn't make you a paranoid schizophrenic. It's what you do with the answers that does ;)
Asking questions doesn't make you a paranoid schizophrenic. It's what you do with the answers that does ;)
104
My father was an engineer in Rocket Engine Testing for 15 years.
So not a surprise that he knows jet fuel burns at temperatures that buckle steel.
Rather than overly complex idiot conspiracies, that simple explanation.
(Oh, Dad's long retired, so he doesn't have skin in the game. Just specific knowledge to the situation.)
So not a surprise that he knows jet fuel burns at temperatures that buckle steel.
Rather than overly complex idiot conspiracies, that simple explanation.
(Oh, Dad's long retired, so he doesn't have skin in the game. Just specific knowledge to the situation.)
105
lol @ 69
There were obvious coverups in the 9/11 Commission, but they weren't in regards to whether or not Al Qaeda was responsible. What the government DID coverup was the fact that the attacks were completely preventable if the intelligence community had done its fucking job.
I love seeing Truthers take those quotes completely out of context.
There were obvious coverups in the 9/11 Commission, but they weren't in regards to whether or not Al Qaeda was responsible. What the government DID coverup was the fact that the attacks were completely preventable if the intelligence community had done its fucking job.
I love seeing Truthers take those quotes completely out of context.
106
Truthers, you're batshit crazy, get over it, sorry but Bush and the collection of politicians in power at the time were not smart enough or even creative enough to concoct something like this. But most importantly is this little fact: There is no one in charge of everything, there is no head controlling the government, it's all just a bunch of small machines grinding away that occasionally manage to do something right.
However, to everyone else, not all people who agree with or even support Ron Paul are truthers, and a person's lame misconceptions like this should not be a deciding factor in politics, that's like saying they shouldn't be president because they don't believe the christian bible is holy. Seriously, what kind of damage could he possibly do because of this delusion? Bring the troops home because he doesn't think anyone there did it? Not sure but that sounds like a win for all. Also don't fool yourselves into thinking that the "evil corporate conspiracy" is no less crazy. I refer you to the "there is no head" fact.
Back to your regularly scheduled flame wars.
However, to everyone else, not all people who agree with or even support Ron Paul are truthers, and a person's lame misconceptions like this should not be a deciding factor in politics, that's like saying they shouldn't be president because they don't believe the christian bible is holy. Seriously, what kind of damage could he possibly do because of this delusion? Bring the troops home because he doesn't think anyone there did it? Not sure but that sounds like a win for all. Also don't fool yourselves into thinking that the "evil corporate conspiracy" is no less crazy. I refer you to the "there is no head" fact.
Back to your regularly scheduled flame wars.
107
@106: "not all people who agree with or even support Ron Paul are truthers"
No, it's just hilarious how entrenched they are in Ron Paul's court.
"a person's lame misconceptions like this should not be a deciding factor in politics"
No, there are a million other reasons to loathe Paul. What you fail to realize is that the reason many people distrust him and think he's insane/naive/a ginormous prick is the same reason why Truthers flock to him. Their attention/adoration is relevant to that end.
No, it's just hilarious how entrenched they are in Ron Paul's court.
"a person's lame misconceptions like this should not be a deciding factor in politics"
No, there are a million other reasons to loathe Paul. What you fail to realize is that the reason many people distrust him and think he's insane/naive/a ginormous prick is the same reason why Truthers flock to him. Their attention/adoration is relevant to that end.
108
Notice how Ron Paul idolaters refer to him as Dr. Ron Paul. It is a lame attempt to give him more credence. Would these same people call Jim McDermott, Dr Jim McDermott. Hardly
109
@108: My favorite is how they give "HE HAS DELIVERED TEN THOUSAND BABIES" as a sign that he both supports women's rights and is Presidential-caliber.
110
No way 'round it. What we have been told, the years and years of theft of our heritage, jobs, bank accounts, damage to our constitutional rights, the wars, the encroaching police state, the dwindling faith in any branch of government down to every last municipality -- all are directly related to the catalyst of what 9/11 represented. 9/11 wasn't just a crime or an act of terrorism, it was The Empire announcing that it is still in charge.
I'm a left wing non-truther, normal Seattle guy that runs around in the same circles all you hip "inside job naysayers" do, who does not buy a line of the 9/11 commission's report (not that I've even read it). However, the proof is in the propaganda. The proof is in how stupid most conspiracy theories that have been trotted out are. The proof is that in all obviousness someone put the money up to get this job done. Why did this job need done? That is the question. The question is not "who was behind it?" We already know the answer to that (it was neither George Bush or Al Queda). Someone seeking to destabilize whilst angering the civilians of this country and by way of instantaneous media transmission, the entire plugged in world as well.
The truth is in the notion, I believe, that it was a show of strength of an ancient global empire who has controlled everything you, I, your great great great grandfather and beyond has ever done in some capacity. It's the lineages, bloodlines of old families that have no need for borders -- those are for us, not for them. That's who did it. Whether they were Muslim or the CIA or some shadowy contractor is immaterial. The outcome has always been the same and will remain the same, simply because it happened. Thus why?
For starters, for people who are not conspiracy theorists but don't buy the troofer bullshit, I recommend Jeff Wells' "The Coincidence Theorist's Guide to 9/11":
http://rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/20…
More...
I'm a left wing non-truther, normal Seattle guy that runs around in the same circles all you hip "inside job naysayers" do, who does not buy a line of the 9/11 commission's report (not that I've even read it). However, the proof is in the propaganda. The proof is in how stupid most conspiracy theories that have been trotted out are. The proof is that in all obviousness someone put the money up to get this job done. Why did this job need done? That is the question. The question is not "who was behind it?" We already know the answer to that (it was neither George Bush or Al Queda). Someone seeking to destabilize whilst angering the civilians of this country and by way of instantaneous media transmission, the entire plugged in world as well.
The truth is in the notion, I believe, that it was a show of strength of an ancient global empire who has controlled everything you, I, your great great great grandfather and beyond has ever done in some capacity. It's the lineages, bloodlines of old families that have no need for borders -- those are for us, not for them. That's who did it. Whether they were Muslim or the CIA or some shadowy contractor is immaterial. The outcome has always been the same and will remain the same, simply because it happened. Thus why?
For starters, for people who are not conspiracy theorists but don't buy the troofer bullshit, I recommend Jeff Wells' "The Coincidence Theorist's Guide to 9/11":
http://rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/20…
111
I really don't like this article. I read the article trying and trying to figure out why Ron Paul will never win, but all I found was the message "The people that support Ron Paul are big stoopid heads, this is why I think so." This is not to say of course that I didn't find some/most of the points that this writer made were valid, but if you wrote an article named: "Pamela Anderson's tits are the greatest" and then wrote about Tommy Lee's cock you could imagine my chagrin. Just Sayin'
112
I really don't like this article. I read the article trying and trying to figure out why Ron Paul will never win, but all I found was the message "The people that support Ron Paul are big stoopid heads, this is why I think so." This is not to say of course that I didn't find some/most of the points that this writer made were valid, but if you wrote an article named: "Pamela Anderson's tits are the greatest" and then wrote about Tommy Lee's cock you could imagine my chagrin. Just Sayin'
113
@110: "However, the proof is in the propaganda"
The reason that we're rolling-eyes at the Alex Jonesers is EXACTLY because we know we're being lied do.
We just don't have our minds so open our brains fall out, we're selective as to what we assume is being fed us. We don't automatically assume conspiracy, when there are plenty of other fact-based cases in which we're being lied to.
We have some amount of sympathy for the idea, but the smugness of truthers who think that people who disagree are "sheeple" is nothing but willful ignorance.
The reason that we're rolling-eyes at the Alex Jonesers is EXACTLY because we know we're being lied do.
We just don't have our minds so open our brains fall out, we're selective as to what we assume is being fed us. We don't automatically assume conspiracy, when there are plenty of other fact-based cases in which we're being lied to.
We have some amount of sympathy for the idea, but the smugness of truthers who think that people who disagree are "sheeple" is nothing but willful ignorance.
114
@111: "The people that support Ron Paul are big stoopid heads, this is why I think so."
Pretty much. There's not enough room in your average newspaper article for a persuasive argument. This was designed to be observations and preaching to the choir, and therefore the ad homs are much more in-line.
Pretty much. There's not enough room in your average newspaper article for a persuasive argument. This was designed to be observations and preaching to the choir, and therefore the ad homs are much more in-line.
115
More coverage of that Hurricane Erin story!! Now we're talking conspiracy theory! This I gotta hear. C'mon, Paul--you had a fresh angle and just let it slip by. Find some Hurricaners and lay the good stuff on us.
116
ick... Constant and the Stranger hit new lows. Count the fallacies anyone?
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies…
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies…
118
I've always heard you shouldn't judge an entire group (Paul supporters) by a few individuals (911 extremists). I say there is no harm in the search for the truth. I think we should question the government's official stance on important events. If we go along with whatever is fed to us, that really does make us like sheep.
119
You peeple have been smoking 2 many funny looking cigarettes.
The city billies are out in full force again.
The city billies are out in full force again.
120
The 10th anniversary Official Version of 9/11 goes something like this…Directed by a beardy-guy from a cave in Afghanistan, nineteen hard-drinking, coke-snorting, devout Muslims enjoy lap dances before their mission to meet Allah…Using nothing more than craft knifes, they overpower cabin crew, passengers and pilots on four planes…And hangover or not, they manage to give the world’s most sophisticated air defense system the slip…Unphased by leaving their “How to Fly a Passenger Jet” guide in the car at the airport, they master the controls in no-time and score direct hits on two towers, causing THREE to collapse completely…Our masterminds even manage to overpower the odd law of physics or two… and the world watches in awe as steel-framed buildings fall symmetrically – through their own mass – at free-fall speed, for the first time in history. Despite all their dastardly cunning, they stupidly give their identity away by using explosion-proof passports, which survive the fireball undamaged and fall to the ground… only to be discovered by the incredible crime-fighting sleuths at the FBI Meanwhile down in Washington…Hani Hanjour, having previously flunked 2-man Cessna flying school, gets carried away with all the success of the day and suddenly finds incredible abilities behind the controls of a Boeing…Instead of flying straight down into the large roof area of the Pentagon, he decides to show off a little…Executing an incredible 270 degree downward spiral, he levels off to hit the low facade of the world’s most heavily defended building……all without a single shot being fired…. or ruining the nicely mowed lawn… and all at a speed just too fast to capture on video……Later, in the skies above Pennsylvania…So desperate to talk to loved ones before their death, some passengers use sheer willpower to connect mobile calls that otherwise would not be possible until several years later…And following a heroic attempt by some to retake control of Flight 93, it crashes into a Shankesville field leaving no trace of engines, fuselage or occupants… except for the standard issue Muslim terrorists bandana……Further south in Florida…President Bush, our brave Commander-in-Chief continues to read “My Pet Goat” to a class full of primary school children… shrugging off the obvious possibility that his life could be in imminent danger…In New York…Trade Center leaseholder Larry Silverstein blesses his own foresight in insuring the buildings against terrorist attack only six weeks previously…While back in Washington, Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz shake their heads in disbelief at their own luck in getting the ‘New Pearl Harbor’ catalyzing event they so desired to pursue their agenda of world domination…And finally, not to be disturbed too much by reports of their own deaths, at least seven of our nineteen suicide hijackers turn up alive and kicking in mainstream media reports (DO NOT ask questions!!)(Go shopping!!)(and for crying out loud sit down and shut up!!)(A TSA pat-down is waiting for you)
More...
122
@118: "I say there is no harm in the search for the truth."
There is however harm in pseudoskepticism and abusing confirmation bias. At best, it makes you a fool. At worst, plenty of people have gone off the deep end "searching for truth".
There is however harm in pseudoskepticism and abusing confirmation bias. At best, it makes you a fool. At worst, plenty of people have gone off the deep end "searching for truth".
123
@120: Plenty of stranger "coincidences" happen every day, sans the breathless descriptions you're giving here.
124
@122 & @123
FYI, you know who thinks that the 1993 WTC bombing was not 'successful' and, by contrast, is positively *beaming* about the 'success' of 9/11? Douglas Feith!
"There had been a number of terrorist attacks over recent years. There was the Cole; there was the embassies in East Africa, the first World Trade Center attack; you can go back to the Marine barracks bombing in Beirut in 1983; and in every case, what the United States government did principally was send out the FBI to try find people that you could identify as perpetrators, so that they could be captured and prosecuted. What you hear from all of this discussion, and it's very important that people focus on it, is this was a different case. This was not let's go out and find people who did it and punish them, this was, we expect further attacks -- there's enormous uncertainty, this was a major blow on the homeland, AND UNLIKE THE FIRST WORLD TRADE CENTER BOMBING, IT WAS SUCCESSFUL. It caused us to completely rethink the terrorism danger b/c terrorists traditionally had gone after fairly small spectacular targets you know, a ticket counter at an airport or blowing up a school bus. This was the first successful terrorist attack of mass destruction, and the president, in what I would say was probably the single most important -- the single most significant decision -- he made as president, said that the purpose of our reaction to 9/11 was to prevent the next attack. Now, no president of the United States had ever reacted to a terrorist attack by saying that the purpose of the United States is to prevent the next terrorist attack. I mean, that was an enormously ambitious goal. That is what, I would say, immediately lifted you out of law enforcement. I mean, you were now well beyond law enforcement into a war on terrorism..."
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/28446…
btw, I'll take Hannah Arendt over Ayn Rand any day:
"Some men and women may or may not have ethical or moral principles but they will never allow such principles to undermine their ability to prosper. Loyalty to the party or institution, deference to superiors, the ability to swim with the tide — these are the values that determine the behaviour of the true careerist and of the banality of evil. On the pre-ethical assumption that the good is to advance in the career, everything else is subordinated. This undertaking can have little or great consequences but it always follows the same procedure of giving up the conscience for the career."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banality_of…
An explication of Hannah Arendt's phrase, "the banality of evil".
More...
FYI, you know who thinks that the 1993 WTC bombing was not 'successful' and, by contrast, is positively *beaming* about the 'success' of 9/11? Douglas Feith!
"There had been a number of terrorist attacks over recent years. There was the Cole; there was the embassies in East Africa, the first World Trade Center attack; you can go back to the Marine barracks bombing in Beirut in 1983; and in every case, what the United States government did principally was send out the FBI to try find people that you could identify as perpetrators, so that they could be captured and prosecuted. What you hear from all of this discussion, and it's very important that people focus on it, is this was a different case. This was not let's go out and find people who did it and punish them, this was, we expect further attacks -- there's enormous uncertainty, this was a major blow on the homeland, AND UNLIKE THE FIRST WORLD TRADE CENTER BOMBING, IT WAS SUCCESSFUL. It caused us to completely rethink the terrorism danger b/c terrorists traditionally had gone after fairly small spectacular targets you know, a ticket counter at an airport or blowing up a school bus. This was the first successful terrorist attack of mass destruction, and the president, in what I would say was probably the single most important -- the single most significant decision -- he made as president, said that the purpose of our reaction to 9/11 was to prevent the next attack. Now, no president of the United States had ever reacted to a terrorist attack by saying that the purpose of the United States is to prevent the next terrorist attack. I mean, that was an enormously ambitious goal. That is what, I would say, immediately lifted you out of law enforcement. I mean, you were now well beyond law enforcement into a war on terrorism..."
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/28446…
btw, I'll take Hannah Arendt over Ayn Rand any day:
"Some men and women may or may not have ethical or moral principles but they will never allow such principles to undermine their ability to prosper. Loyalty to the party or institution, deference to superiors, the ability to swim with the tide — these are the values that determine the behaviour of the true careerist and of the banality of evil. On the pre-ethical assumption that the good is to advance in the career, everything else is subordinated. This undertaking can have little or great consequences but it always follows the same procedure of giving up the conscience for the career."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banality_of…
An explication of Hannah Arendt's phrase, "the banality of evil".
125
@122 & 123@
PS: Why not more whistle-blowers? Is the mentality displayed in the quote below surprising to anyone -- does anyone doubt that the vast majority of people are in this boat?
Throwawaycop444 of his reluctance/refusal to speak out publicly about police rough handling of protesters (peaceful ones) at the ongoing Occupy Wall Street demostration:
"I would love to, but I would be putting my income on the line...and I know that sounds very anti-heroic, but it's how my family and I survive right now.. I'm just glad, personally, in my department (don't ask which), these atrocities are very very minimal, and as far as I know, my co-workers are very similar to me in this attitude, and we are a station in a rather large city. The one time we had any officer in our department step out of line, he was suspended without pay until the end of his hearing, and then let go."
http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comment…
PS: Why not more whistle-blowers? Is the mentality displayed in the quote below surprising to anyone -- does anyone doubt that the vast majority of people are in this boat?
Throwawaycop444 of his reluctance/refusal to speak out publicly about police rough handling of protesters (peaceful ones) at the ongoing Occupy Wall Street demostration:
"I would love to, but I would be putting my income on the line...and I know that sounds very anti-heroic, but it's how my family and I survive right now.. I'm just glad, personally, in my department (don't ask which), these atrocities are very very minimal, and as far as I know, my co-workers are very similar to me in this attitude, and we are a station in a rather large city. The one time we had any officer in our department step out of line, he was suspended without pay until the end of his hearing, and then let go."
http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comment…
126
@ 120
Just to back you up on the Shanksville shootdown, here is a link to the article of admission and a video link to the ceremony and admission of engagement by U.S. airmen "Happy Hooligans". C'mon all you pillow biters,"Lets Roll!"
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?…
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=…
Just to back you up on the Shanksville shootdown, here is a link to the article of admission and a video link to the ceremony and admission of engagement by U.S. airmen "Happy Hooligans". C'mon all you pillow biters,"Lets Roll!"
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?…
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=…
127
Paul Constant writes:
"Truther thought tends to resemble Zeno's arrow paradox: There is no idea so simple that you can't complicate it by breaking it in half. We all saw planes smash into those buildings. Therefore, the planes must not have caused the collapse."
Dr. Graeme MacQueen explains why this dig/ cheap shot is so poorly observed:
Watch the whole presentation here:
http://peopleforfreedom.com/new-world-or…
PS I'm endorsing the speech, not the website...
"Truther thought tends to resemble Zeno's arrow paradox: There is no idea so simple that you can't complicate it by breaking it in half. We all saw planes smash into those buildings. Therefore, the planes must not have caused the collapse."
Dr. Graeme MacQueen explains why this dig/ cheap shot is so poorly observed:
PT 3/4
Watch the whole presentation here:
http://peopleforfreedom.com/new-world-or…
PS I'm endorsing the speech, not the website...
128
@125: "PS: Why not more whistle-blowers? Is the mentality displayed in the quote below surprising to anyone -- does anyone doubt that the vast majority of people are in this boat?"
The difference between 9/11 and the Wall Street protests is that a lack of evidence is not evidence itself, while there IS a ton of direct, nonsubjective evidence for the Wall Street protests, simply STRONGLY filtered by the MSM.
The difference between 9/11 and the Wall Street protests is that a lack of evidence is not evidence itself, while there IS a ton of direct, nonsubjective evidence for the Wall Street protests, simply STRONGLY filtered by the MSM.
129
@100:willendorf: I love your cat photo icon!
Please pass the nachos!!! I've been enjoying some chilled Chardonnay!
Please pass the nachos!!! I've been enjoying some chilled Chardonnay!
130
@128
I was trying to make a general case, using what I thought was a fairly representative example: a civil servant w/ a family to feed. Not going to make waves and risk losing his job. Plenty of those types in the world, no?
Anyway, 9/11 whistle-blowers *do* exist and have important things to say. Here's the testimony of one:
-------
“In February of 2001 I was in Peshawar Pakistan helping to put on a peacemaking workshop for Afghans. The workshop was led by peace researcher Johann Galtung and I was there as a member of the Center for Peace Studies at McMaster University where I was a university professor. Our host was the Afghan University in Peshawar. In other words, we always work w/ people in the region in question in war zones and, in this case, w/ a great many Afghans. This workshop went on for about eight hours a day for five days. There were one hundred participants about a quarter of whom were former Afghan cabinet ministers. Most of the others were academics, leaders of NGOs, or journalists...
I'd like to report that during those five days and two further days w/ NGOs at the United Nations, many ideas were put forward to help create a stable peace in Afghanistan. Yet not a single person -- guess what -- proposed that a foreign invasion and occupation of Afghanistan was the way to go. Most of the people we talked w/ considered the Taliban their adversaries, but none suggested the Taliban had no part whatsoever in a future Afghanistan; on the contrary, they proposed a peace process to involve the Taliban, which we do not have in 2009...not one single woman that I talked to there, or when I visited Afghanistan earlier, called for military strikes to save them from the Taliban. Their dominant view, expressed repeatedly, was that we needed to end war and the culture of war in Afghanistan, that every effort needed to be made to end it creatively and w/ as little destruction as possible.
The second thing I want to report to you, in addition to those comments, was one that puzzled me at the time. A well-dressed male participant, probably a former Afghan cabinet minister, stood up after a nice brainstorming session about what Afghans could do to make their country more peaceful and said..."The USA is right now planning a war in Afghanistan." OK, this was six months before 9/11. "It's about oil and a base to protect their interests. They will build a base; they will be there for a long time, and unfortunately, our discussions here today are of no avail." And then he sat down and there was silence. Given what know today about foreknowledge of the fall 2001 invasion of Afghanistan, foreknowledge in Pakistan and India, it seems to me he wasn't just making a good guess, he was telling us what he learned, probably from Pakistani officials.
In other words, he knew about the invasion of Afghanistan seven months before it took place...I mention that fellow just to sort of say shame on me, b/c when 9/11 happened, I should've had a little bit of a head start in understanding it, as compared w/ most people in North America. So, did I cotton on right away on 9/11 that this was a very fishy event? I'm sad to say I didn't."
-------
This is an excerpt from a speech by Dr. Graeme MacQueen which can be viewed here (btw, I’m not endorsing the website – just the speech):
http://peopleforfreedom.com/new-world-or…
More...
I was trying to make a general case, using what I thought was a fairly representative example: a civil servant w/ a family to feed. Not going to make waves and risk losing his job. Plenty of those types in the world, no?
Anyway, 9/11 whistle-blowers *do* exist and have important things to say. Here's the testimony of one:
-------
“In February of 2001 I was in Peshawar Pakistan helping to put on a peacemaking workshop for Afghans. The workshop was led by peace researcher Johann Galtung and I was there as a member of the Center for Peace Studies at McMaster University where I was a university professor. Our host was the Afghan University in Peshawar. In other words, we always work w/ people in the region in question in war zones and, in this case, w/ a great many Afghans. This workshop went on for about eight hours a day for five days. There were one hundred participants about a quarter of whom were former Afghan cabinet ministers. Most of the others were academics, leaders of NGOs, or journalists...
I'd like to report that during those five days and two further days w/ NGOs at the United Nations, many ideas were put forward to help create a stable peace in Afghanistan. Yet not a single person -- guess what -- proposed that a foreign invasion and occupation of Afghanistan was the way to go. Most of the people we talked w/ considered the Taliban their adversaries, but none suggested the Taliban had no part whatsoever in a future Afghanistan; on the contrary, they proposed a peace process to involve the Taliban, which we do not have in 2009...not one single woman that I talked to there, or when I visited Afghanistan earlier, called for military strikes to save them from the Taliban. Their dominant view, expressed repeatedly, was that we needed to end war and the culture of war in Afghanistan, that every effort needed to be made to end it creatively and w/ as little destruction as possible.
The second thing I want to report to you, in addition to those comments, was one that puzzled me at the time. A well-dressed male participant, probably a former Afghan cabinet minister, stood up after a nice brainstorming session about what Afghans could do to make their country more peaceful and said..."The USA is right now planning a war in Afghanistan." OK, this was six months before 9/11. "It's about oil and a base to protect their interests. They will build a base; they will be there for a long time, and unfortunately, our discussions here today are of no avail." And then he sat down and there was silence. Given what know today about foreknowledge of the fall 2001 invasion of Afghanistan, foreknowledge in Pakistan and India, it seems to me he wasn't just making a good guess, he was telling us what he learned, probably from Pakistani officials.
In other words, he knew about the invasion of Afghanistan seven months before it took place...I mention that fellow just to sort of say shame on me, b/c when 9/11 happened, I should've had a little bit of a head start in understanding it, as compared w/ most people in North America. So, did I cotton on right away on 9/11 that this was a very fishy event? I'm sad to say I didn't."
-------
This is an excerpt from a speech by Dr. Graeme MacQueen which can be viewed here (btw, I’m not endorsing the website – just the speech):
http://peopleforfreedom.com/new-world-or…
131
@130: I don't doubt the US loved the idea of invading the areas of the middle-east that aren't business-friendly and bombing the fuck out of them, creating exclusive mineral/fuel rights with the installed puppets.
You'll find that many-to-most people who think the truthers are batshit also agree with this.
There's a distinct difference between opportunism and conspiracy. We have contingency plans for invading every country, INCLUDING EVERY ONE OF OUR ALLIES.
Do I still believe that independent actors without US aid took out the WTC? Absolutely! It was an imperfect but well-executed plan, our intervention only could have fucked things up.
You'll find that many-to-most people who think the truthers are batshit also agree with this.
There's a distinct difference between opportunism and conspiracy. We have contingency plans for invading every country, INCLUDING EVERY ONE OF OUR ALLIES.
Do I still believe that independent actors without US aid took out the WTC? Absolutely! It was an imperfect but well-executed plan, our intervention only could have fucked things up.
132
@ 131: Contingency plans are different from plans w/ set timelines, and I think in his statements, Dr. MacQueen makes clear, implicitly at least, that there was a timetable for making this happen. So, personally, I don’t buy the idea that our invasion of Afghanistan was a case of mere opportunism.
I also don’t buy the implication that the US gov’t is incompetent … you seem to suggest that when you say that “our intervention could have only fucked things up.” I mean is the US gov’t competent or isn’t it? I think you assume too much. The long historical view suggests that the US gov't is quite competent...
Btw, I believe the expression is “batshit crazy” … w/ the emphasis on crazy. Which leads me to another whistleblower you may have heard of, Susan Lindauer, who was deemed too ‘crazy’ to stand trial. She was doing backchannel negotiations w/ the Iraqis in an attempt to head off another war (needless to say, she did not prevail). Anyway, she was here in Seattle recently promoting her book and gave a talk which I attended. I can tell you that, one, she’s not the least bit crazy, and, two, she’s telling the truth:
------
A Personal Warning to a Friend
Dr. Parke Godfrey was one of my closest friends in Maryland, working on his doctoral dissertation in computer science at the University of Maryland in College Park. He had family living in the Connecticut suburbs of New York City. We spoke frequently, socializing a couple of times a week, and shared much of the same political outlook.
Godfrey has gone on to launch a distinguished career as a tenured Associate Professor of Computer Science and Technology at York University in Toronto, Canada. He presents a calm, studied demeanor. He is a precise and methodical thinker who chooses his words carefully. During difficult courtroom questioning, he would frequently pause and take his time to give an accurate, thoughtful response. He proved a superior witness by any measure.
In shattering testimony a mere 1,000 yards from ground zero of the World Trade Center, Godfrey told the Court how, starting with the Lockerbie Trial in the year 2000, and several times in the spring and summer of 2001, I warned him that we expected a major strike on the southern part of Manhattan, and that the attack would encompass the World Trade Center.
In courtroom testimony, Godfrey said I told him that, "a massive attack would occur in the southern part of Manhattan that would involve airplanes and possibly a nuclear weapon."53
He testified that I told him "the attack would complete the cycle of the first bombing of the World Trade Center. It would finish what was started in the 1993 attack."
Godfrey: "I asked her about the nature of it. She said that she thought it would be something very, very big. I asked her, well, what do you mean? She said that what was started in '93, she thought was going to come back."
Shaughnessy: "What started in '93?"
Godfrey: "Well, the attempt on the World Trade Center."
Godfrey: "She said that there would be an attack in late summer, early fall. She thought it was some time imminent."
On cross examination, he was more specific, declaring that I warned him in August, that the attack was "imminent."
Equally devastating, Godfrey testified under oath that he told the FBI about my 9/11 warning during a sit down interview in Toronto in September, 2004, a few months after my arrest—and before the 9/11 Commission issued its report, meaning information about the warning could have been submitted to Congressional investigators.55 The FBI interview with Godfrey was jointly attended by the Canadian Royal Mounted Police. Asked why a member of the Canadian Police had been present at the FBI interview, he replied with a smile: "They were there to assure my protection."
Unfortunately, nobody was present to assure mine.
The fact was I knew too much, and I was starting to talk. That's why I was sitting in that holding cage waiting for my bail arraignment.
My arrest came hard and fast after I approached Senator Lott and Senator McCain's offices,56 asking to tell the whole saga from start to finish.
U.S. Intelligence understood exactly what that meant. I would blow the whistle and expose the whole façade. I was their Asset, after all. They'd been supervising my work for many years, and they were intimately familiar with how I operate and what I would reveal. They already knew I warned about a major attack on New York City identical to the 9/11 scenario throughout the summer of 2001. They knew I had a vast wealth of first-hand knowledge about Pre-War Intelligence, including Baghdad's cooperation with the 9/11 investigation. And they knew that my truth would be nothing remotely similar to what Congress and the White House was selling to the American people.
Lindauer, Susan (2010-10-29). EXTREME PREJUDICE-- The Terrifying Story of the Patriot Act and the Cover Ups of 9/11 and Iraq (pp. 26-27). CreateSPACE. Kindle Edition.
------
Cheers!
More...
I also don’t buy the implication that the US gov’t is incompetent … you seem to suggest that when you say that “our intervention could have only fucked things up.” I mean is the US gov’t competent or isn’t it? I think you assume too much. The long historical view suggests that the US gov't is quite competent...
Btw, I believe the expression is “batshit crazy” … w/ the emphasis on crazy. Which leads me to another whistleblower you may have heard of, Susan Lindauer, who was deemed too ‘crazy’ to stand trial. She was doing backchannel negotiations w/ the Iraqis in an attempt to head off another war (needless to say, she did not prevail). Anyway, she was here in Seattle recently promoting her book and gave a talk which I attended. I can tell you that, one, she’s not the least bit crazy, and, two, she’s telling the truth:
------
A Personal Warning to a Friend
Dr. Parke Godfrey was one of my closest friends in Maryland, working on his doctoral dissertation in computer science at the University of Maryland in College Park. He had family living in the Connecticut suburbs of New York City. We spoke frequently, socializing a couple of times a week, and shared much of the same political outlook.
Godfrey has gone on to launch a distinguished career as a tenured Associate Professor of Computer Science and Technology at York University in Toronto, Canada. He presents a calm, studied demeanor. He is a precise and methodical thinker who chooses his words carefully. During difficult courtroom questioning, he would frequently pause and take his time to give an accurate, thoughtful response. He proved a superior witness by any measure.
In shattering testimony a mere 1,000 yards from ground zero of the World Trade Center, Godfrey told the Court how, starting with the Lockerbie Trial in the year 2000, and several times in the spring and summer of 2001, I warned him that we expected a major strike on the southern part of Manhattan, and that the attack would encompass the World Trade Center.
In courtroom testimony, Godfrey said I told him that, "a massive attack would occur in the southern part of Manhattan that would involve airplanes and possibly a nuclear weapon."53
He testified that I told him "the attack would complete the cycle of the first bombing of the World Trade Center. It would finish what was started in the 1993 attack."
Godfrey: "I asked her about the nature of it. She said that she thought it would be something very, very big. I asked her, well, what do you mean? She said that what was started in '93, she thought was going to come back."
Shaughnessy: "What started in '93?"
Godfrey: "Well, the attempt on the World Trade Center."
Godfrey: "She said that there would be an attack in late summer, early fall. She thought it was some time imminent."
On cross examination, he was more specific, declaring that I warned him in August, that the attack was "imminent."
Equally devastating, Godfrey testified under oath that he told the FBI about my 9/11 warning during a sit down interview in Toronto in September, 2004, a few months after my arrest—and before the 9/11 Commission issued its report, meaning information about the warning could have been submitted to Congressional investigators.55 The FBI interview with Godfrey was jointly attended by the Canadian Royal Mounted Police. Asked why a member of the Canadian Police had been present at the FBI interview, he replied with a smile: "They were there to assure my protection."
Unfortunately, nobody was present to assure mine.
The fact was I knew too much, and I was starting to talk. That's why I was sitting in that holding cage waiting for my bail arraignment.
My arrest came hard and fast after I approached Senator Lott and Senator McCain's offices,56 asking to tell the whole saga from start to finish.
U.S. Intelligence understood exactly what that meant. I would blow the whistle and expose the whole façade. I was their Asset, after all. They'd been supervising my work for many years, and they were intimately familiar with how I operate and what I would reveal. They already knew I warned about a major attack on New York City identical to the 9/11 scenario throughout the summer of 2001. They knew I had a vast wealth of first-hand knowledge about Pre-War Intelligence, including Baghdad's cooperation with the 9/11 investigation. And they knew that my truth would be nothing remotely similar to what Congress and the White House was selling to the American people.
Lindauer, Susan (2010-10-29). EXTREME PREJUDICE-- The Terrifying Story of the Patriot Act and the Cover Ups of 9/11 and Iraq (pp. 26-27). CreateSPACE. Kindle Edition.
------
Cheers!
133
@132: "I also don’t buy the implication that the US gov’t is incompetent … you seem to suggest that when you say that “our intervention could have only fucked things up.” I mean is the US gov’t competent or isn’t it? I think you assume too much. The long historical view suggests that the US gov't is quite competent..."
The US government is competent at getting what it wants, but not immediately. We're not good at surgical operations, think Bay of Pigs.
"A Personal Warning to a Friend"
Post-hoc rationalizations are always 100% correct.
The US government is competent at getting what it wants, but not immediately. We're not good at surgical operations, think Bay of Pigs.
"A Personal Warning to a Friend"
Post-hoc rationalizations are always 100% correct.
135
@134
"And never ever clouded by false memory."
Whose false memories are we talking about? Susan Lindauer's? Dr. Parke Godfrey's? I have a feeling that even if you were forced to accept that this is all true (and, unfortunately, it is), you'd find a way to minimize its import... this information doesn't resonate w/ your aesthetic sensibilities, so you reject it as a fantasy.
"Post-hoc rationalizations are always 100% correct. "
I think that sums up your whole mode of thought... well put.
"And never ever clouded by false memory."
Whose false memories are we talking about? Susan Lindauer's? Dr. Parke Godfrey's? I have a feeling that even if you were forced to accept that this is all true (and, unfortunately, it is), you'd find a way to minimize its import... this information doesn't resonate w/ your aesthetic sensibilities, so you reject it as a fantasy.
"Post-hoc rationalizations are always 100% correct. "
I think that sums up your whole mode of thought... well put.
137
@136: Sibel Edmonds! Another very courageous person. Thank you.
She has a website:
http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/
I just learned about it, so I can't vouch for its overall quality, but I'd say definitely worth checking out.
She has a website:
http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/
I just learned about it, so I can't vouch for its overall quality, but I'd say definitely worth checking out.
138
I'm not supposed to taint the past with future insight, but I can't help myself: If you don't stop voting for looks, height, and charm, your civilization is in serious trouble.
140
@138: "I'm not supposed to taint the past with future insight, but I can't help myself: If you don't stop voting for looks, height, and charm, your civilization is in serious trouble."
The problem isn't that we're voting for the guy with rhetorical skill and good hair.
The problem is that the smart guys who can execute as well as they can think (regardless of looks) will never get to the primaries, and never get any support if (somehow) elected.
The problem isn't that we're voting for the guy with rhetorical skill and good hair.
The problem is that the smart guys who can execute as well as they can think (regardless of looks) will never get to the primaries, and never get any support if (somehow) elected.
141
@140:......because the U.S. is a shamefully lookist country? Because
Republicans are doing what they can to make everyone fat and dumb?
Republicans are doing what they can to make everyone fat and dumb?
142
I can't bear to read all the "sheeple" comments posted here. In a nutshell, Ron Paul is our ONLY hope. If you don't understand what Ron Paul is about then I suggest you do some serious research as I have. If you don't yet understand the false right/left paradigm I feel sorry for you. Your IGNORANCE is killing our country.
Free your mind at: peopleforfreedom.com
Free your mind at: peopleforfreedom.com
143
So I don't support Ron Paul nor do I believe the government conspiracy theory about 9/11, because I am able to think critically about what took place that day. For example, world trade center tower #7 came down just like WTC# 1 and #2, but NO plane hit tower #7. So for all of you non believers out there I suggest turning off the tv and doing your own research. Please don't tell me I'm not patriotic, because I served as a corpsman in the U.S.N and was detached to the Marines for four of my eight years of service. I did three tours in iraq. I also have a four year degree. Do I believe in all conspiracy theories? Hell no. For example, I don't believe 19 men, 5 of who are still alive, orchestrated the biggest attacks on U.S Soil from a fucking cave. If you believe this story you dumber than George Bush Jr. Wake up all you sheeple. Fuck, we all leave in this cesspool together.
144
@142: Um, it sounds more like you need to do some research on why you're so into Ron Paul. Be careful who you call ignorant sheeple!
@143: Three combat tours as a corpsman must have been intense! I'm a U.S. Navy veteran with a college degree, too: I was a supply grunt for the Navy SEALs. I never got deployed, but war is hell no matter where you're assigned.
I'm actually glad I don't have a TV---I sure don't miss the mudslinging propaganda bullshit.
@143: Three combat tours as a corpsman must have been intense! I'm a U.S. Navy veteran with a college degree, too: I was a supply grunt for the Navy SEALs. I never got deployed, but war is hell no matter where you're assigned.
I'm actually glad I don't have a TV---I sure don't miss the mudslinging propaganda bullshit.
145
Total hit piece. How many straw men can you shove in one blatantly biased article? Halfway through this story and the straw men go out the window. Then we read that "truthers" are paranoid whack jobs who cling to conspiracy theories which have no evidence.
I wouldn't dream of trying to educate someone like Paul Constant or any of you truth and liberty haters. I've done plenty of research and it's beyond obvious we live in a police state. We aren't free citizens of a representative democratic republic. We are ruled by a cabal of social engineering control freaks who have quite a "Brave New World" planned. If you still think your vote counts you're sadly deceived. We get to choose each election between previously selected candidates. No matter which person wins the election the results are always the same. Freedom dies and Big Brother gains control over us all.
For those of you, such as Paul Constant, who mock, malign, and misrepresent those crazy truthers, fuck you.
When the reality of the "New World Order" reveals itself and we are nothing more than property it will be your fault. Why? Because the illusion of safety and the righteousness of our nation is more important then critically examining the governments lies. You would rather attack the messengers than stand united as free people against the tyranny
If most of us were to resist now we could restore our stolen liberties as well as the rule of law. We could end the elite ruling class who care nothing for their fellow man but to enslave and destroy them.
But it won't happen. Thanks for the nightmare future you stupid fucking sheep. Once more Mr. Constant, fuck you!
I wouldn't dream of trying to educate someone like Paul Constant or any of you truth and liberty haters. I've done plenty of research and it's beyond obvious we live in a police state. We aren't free citizens of a representative democratic republic. We are ruled by a cabal of social engineering control freaks who have quite a "Brave New World" planned. If you still think your vote counts you're sadly deceived. We get to choose each election between previously selected candidates. No matter which person wins the election the results are always the same. Freedom dies and Big Brother gains control over us all.
For those of you, such as Paul Constant, who mock, malign, and misrepresent those crazy truthers, fuck you.
When the reality of the "New World Order" reveals itself and we are nothing more than property it will be your fault. Why? Because the illusion of safety and the righteousness of our nation is more important then critically examining the governments lies. You would rather attack the messengers than stand united as free people against the tyranny
If most of us were to resist now we could restore our stolen liberties as well as the rule of law. We could end the elite ruling class who care nothing for their fellow man but to enslave and destroy them.
But it won't happen. Thanks for the nightmare future you stupid fucking sheep. Once more Mr. Constant, fuck you!
147
@141: "because the U.S. is a shamefully lookist country? Because
Republicans are doing what they can to make everyone fat and dumb?"
Are there that many ugly world leaders?
Besides it's not like the DNC has much to offer us either, they deserve much of the blame for agreeing to lower the discourse to "combat" the Palins, etc.
@143: "For example, world trade center tower #7 came down just like WTC# 1 and #2, but NO plane hit tower #7"
You conveniently fail to mention that there was damage to WTC7 from the original strike.
"Then we read that "truthers" are paranoid whack jobs who cling to conspiracy theories which have no evidence."
Well, yeah. Exactly.
I stream Alex Jones for fun, but while I'd say he seriously has 60% of stuff that's reasonable and that actually concerns me (which amounts to maybe 10% of the MSM chatter) the 40% is absolute, laughable rubbish and anyone who believes it is a manchild with Dunning–Kruger in full effect.
Republicans are doing what they can to make everyone fat and dumb?"
Are there that many ugly world leaders?
Besides it's not like the DNC has much to offer us either, they deserve much of the blame for agreeing to lower the discourse to "combat" the Palins, etc.
@143: "For example, world trade center tower #7 came down just like WTC# 1 and #2, but NO plane hit tower #7"
You conveniently fail to mention that there was damage to WTC7 from the original strike.
"Then we read that "truthers" are paranoid whack jobs who cling to conspiracy theories which have no evidence."
Well, yeah. Exactly.
I stream Alex Jones for fun, but while I'd say he seriously has 60% of stuff that's reasonable and that actually concerns me (which amounts to maybe 10% of the MSM chatter) the 40% is absolute, laughable rubbish and anyone who believes it is a manchild with Dunning–Kruger in full effect.
148
@147: Republicans want to privatize the colleges and universities so that only the wealthy can further pursue higher educations. In the South, states such as Mississippi, and Alabama, where a lot of voters avidly support---surprise!!--the GOP---have alarmingly high obesity, uneducated, and unemployment ratings from national studies taken.
Please take a good look around you, undead ayn rand. How many ads feature female models weighing at least 20 pounds under normal body weights? How many TV shows depict the guys / dads/ boyfriends as pudgy slobs while the wives / girlfriends are tiny, subservient little doormats (i.e.: The Simpsons / Family Guy)? Guess who owns the TV networks and the media? Republicans! And they're chortling all the way to their banks!
And YES, I think George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, John Boehner, and the rest of their ilk are elephant-butt ugly.
Please take a good look around you, undead ayn rand. How many ads feature female models weighing at least 20 pounds under normal body weights? How many TV shows depict the guys / dads/ boyfriends as pudgy slobs while the wives / girlfriends are tiny, subservient little doormats (i.e.: The Simpsons / Family Guy)? Guess who owns the TV networks and the media? Republicans! And they're chortling all the way to their banks!
And YES, I think George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, John Boehner, and the rest of their ilk are elephant-butt ugly.
149
@148: I'm not saying that the GOP and their teabaggery offerings are any better, I'm saying that I sympathize with criticisms of the DNC's financial entanglements and contribution to the ever-growing police state and that I give them no ridicule for that until they start with the BARRY SOETERO shit and my eyes glaze over.
151
Actually, we're entering less of Aldous Huxley's Brave New World and more of George Orwell's Animal Farm. They warned us.
So did General Dwight D. Eisenhower (before he became President of the U.S.).
So did General Dwight D. Eisenhower (before he became President of the U.S.).
152
The only difference between the parties is the color anyway ... blue and red ... that's about it.
153
I will never believe everything the government tells us about anything after the assassination of JFK. Until we get people in the representative positions who pass sweeping anti corruption legislation aimed at themselves, and when the politicians are held strictly accountable for such corruption, we cannot trust the government with as much as the proper disposal of a gum wrapper. Ron Paul is HONEST and bound by the principals that we ALL should follow, With the greed and lying done by most in the political arena, he is the only sane chioce that will effect a real and positive return of the country, to what our founding fathers had in mind.
GO RON PAUL
GO RON PAUL
154
The reason people love Ron Paul, is because though he may have some ideas floating around his head not everyone agrees with, he know as a politician it's not his job to legislate them.
He has never voted contrary to the constitution, or himself in 22 years of congressional service. There is no other politician who can make the same claim.
Is it so strange to like a candidate that does what he says and says what he does, exactly as the constitution mandates?
If the crazies around a good idea take the meaning out of it then what hope is there for the occupy movement?
He has never voted contrary to the constitution, or himself in 22 years of congressional service. There is no other politician who can make the same claim.
Is it so strange to like a candidate that does what he says and says what he does, exactly as the constitution mandates?
If the crazies around a good idea take the meaning out of it then what hope is there for the occupy movement?
155
This article proves what a moron Paul Constant is when it comes to politics. Ron Paul is a respected, devoted, and consistent member of Congress. His opposition to war, police states, the war on drugs, and banks too big to fail is closer to Constant's own beliefs then any other Republican candidate. If the Republicans win, we could do a lot worse than Ron Paul, terrifyingly worse, yet Constant can't resist poking fun.
157
Spot on! The Paul-bots are sick little people who cling to an idea a week, month, year and ride it until it dies.
Paul is their whacko idea of the year. By December they will be on to something else.
Paul is their whacko idea of the year. By December they will be on to something else.
158
I moved to Seattle last year in hopes of a better life. Seattle I thought was a city of open minded free thinkers. Sadly most of the people I have talked to boil down to nothing more than bigots and I thought the south had some bigots. The great city of Seattle is home to a bunch of fascists promoting forced charity of thier causes.
I don't vote for republicans anymore. The party no longer has its core values it was formed upon so long ago. We are watching the birth of the great third party in American politics. Also any DEMS responding please try not to resort to childish name calling like "paulbots" give a explanations of your views, instead of trying to reduce this into a fight in the high school gym.
I don't vote for republicans anymore. The party no longer has its core values it was formed upon so long ago. We are watching the birth of the great third party in American politics. Also any DEMS responding please try not to resort to childish name calling like "paulbots" give a explanations of your views, instead of trying to reduce this into a fight in the high school gym.
RSS
Twitter
Comments (158) RSS