“I guess it was a seagull.”  good guess!

So why still no investigation.? Well let’s see if the investigation goes bad for the government it blows the hell out of a reason for the Patriot act, the war in Iraq, the war in Afghanistan, and would you ever believe the government or the mainstream media again? This why the whole subject remains radio-active.  Airplane going through the corner of a building?  If it was the same crap I saw, it was footage of what they told you was an airplane.  I have seen this in frame by frame slow motion and still cannot make out an airplane.

Aluminum bodied airplanes are not likely to go through three steel-re-enforced
walls at the Pentagon and several steel support columns between the first and
second wall.  We are not allowed to see anything from the cameras in and around
the Pentagon nor are we allowed to hear what is on the black boxes.  Move along
folks nothing to see here, sure!

The unsupported statement by “youraveragejoe” is mere fluff.  Like most people who offer only a knee-jerk dismissal of anything that questions the political establishment, avg_joe tries to dismiss all 9/11 evidence without even bothering to explain why - as if it should be evident that he’s an expert in such matters?  There are plenty of highly experienced and qualified people in technical disciplines all around the world who strongly challenge the official story of 9/11.  And many of these challengers happen to be from Intelligence agency backgrounds in mature European nations with active programs.  It’s known…

Sylvia et al:

NYCCAN - an organization comprised of 9/11 family members, first responders and others most directly affected by the events of 9/11 - have submitted a petition to the New York City Council for a ballot intiative for this Fall.  If put on the ballot and voted in (i.e., passed by NY-ers), this initiative would create a new, non-political, non-partisan 9/11 “commission” comprised of a family members, first responders, and a wide variety of interested but non-conflicted panelists.

This new commission would have subpoena powers, and would have a mandate to follow ALL lines of inquiry no matter WHERE they might lead.  It would be what we hoped the 9/11 Commission might have been, but definitely was not.

The petition has enough signatures to be put on the ballot.  However, even if it is challenged (which the Council can do under certain circumstances), there are enough “reserve” signatures to assure that the initiative will be on the ballot this Fall.

A Zogby poll a few years ago showed that more than half of all New Yorkers believe that the truth of the 9/11 attacks has not come out, and would support a new investigation.  This number has only grown since then, so passage of the initiative by New Yorkers is virtually assured.

This is the first chance that we will have to TRULY investigate the events of 9/11, without political and personal conflicts of interest, and with a mandate to get to the TRUTH - no matter how painful or politically unsavory that truth may be.

For those who live in NYC, look for the initiative this Fall - and vote YES!

Peace.

This is pseudo-intellectual claptrap, folks.  Making a career about 9/11, Bush hating, and pretending to be an economist.

When do we learn how many CIA( & false front companies) and assorted intell officers were killed 9/11 in the towers?

In the Army…..incompetant officers were(are) often fragged….but at CIA after 9/11 many who ignored spot on intell were promoted & awarded with fat budget increases.

yeah…it still stinks to the heavens…what did Bush/Rove/Cheney say: “You’re either with us or against us.”
how simple…how psychologically suspicious…its called a tell in poker.

All:

For those who are interested, NY911Truth founder Les Jamieson has a fabulous new weekly Internet radio program called “9/11 - Truth or Consequences.”  It is at http://www.therealpublicradio.net, and can be heard on Tuesday evenings at 7pm New York time.

As you may know, NY911Truth (of which I have been a member for about five years) has a ballot initiative out that would create a new, non-political, non-partisan investigation into the events of 9/11, since we all know the 9/11 Commission Report was a whitewash, and that hundreds of questions have not been answered.  Information on the ballot initiative can be found at http://www.nyc911initiative.org.  We already have 30,000 signatures, and we need another 15,000 by September in order to make the initiative “veto-proof.”

Les’ radio show is mostly geared toward asking the hard questions and making the case for a new investigation.

Hope you will listen to the show.

Peace.

George/Dave:

Although there are theories re the use of a nuclear device at the WTC, there is simply no hard, clear evidence that such was the case.  Despite the claims of some of the more “radical” 9/11 sites, there is simply no evidence that radioactivity existed at the site - and certainly no APPRECIABLE radioactivity.

Even within a “conspiracy theory,” Occam’s Razor still holds.  In this case, ALL the various aspects of the collapses of WTC 1, 2 and 7 can be explained thoroughly WITHOUT the inclusion of nuclear devices.

The use of thermite would account for every single aspect of the collapses, including (i) exploding outward and upward, (ii) the intense heat (and molten metal) below the surface for days, and (iii) the degree of pyroclastic flow from the collapses.  Indeed, one fact belies the claim of nuclear devices: WTC 7 collapsed perfectly into its own footprint, and even the twin towers collapsed very closely within their footprints.  Any “excessive” outward explosion (which would have occurred with nuclear devices) would have sent debris in a much larger arc, over a greater area.

Also, Willie Rodriguez and others who were in the basement when the “foundation-breaking” bomb went off just before the first plane hit did not exhibit ANY signs of radioactivity on them.  And since they were closer to that bomb than anyone else, they, of all people, would have shown EXTREME signs of radioactivity if a nuclear device had been used: indeed, Willie would be dying (or dead) of radiation poisoning by now.

When one investigates, discusses and debates the various aspects of 9/11, it is important that one not simply accept the word of one or two or even three sources.  One must read dozens of sources, “read between the lines,” and use both logic and common sense to determine what the most likely scenario is.

In this case, as “cool” and “subversive” as it might be to think that nuclear devices were used at the WTC, neither the evidence, logic nor common sense support it.

Peace.

George:

Radioactive?  Hmmm…  Even if WTC 1, 2 and 7 were brought down by controlled demolition, that would not leave them radioactive: thermite is not a radioactive substance.  Not sure why there should be any radioactivity present in the steel…

Peace.

Da Bronx:

“Actually, that’s false. The Maine’s hull was blown OUT not in.”

Sorry, buddy, but THAT is inconclusive.  The following is from the U.S. Navy’s official site:

“The U.S. Navy Department immediately formed a board of inquiry [1898] to determine the reason for Maine’s destruction.  The inquiry, conducted in Havana, lasted four weeks.  The condition of the submerged wreck and the lack of technical expertise prevented the board from being as thorough as later investigations.  In the end, they concluded that a mine had detonated under the ship.  The board did not attempt to fix blame for the placement of the device…In 1911 the Navy Department ordered a second board of inquiry after Congress voted funds for the removal of the wreck of Maine from Havana Harbor.  U.S. Army engineers built a cofferdam around the sunken battleship, thus exposing it, and giving naval investigators an opportunity to examine and photograph the wreckage in detail.  FINDING THE BOTTOM HULL PLATES IN THE AREA OF THE RESERVE SIX-INCH MAGAZINE BENT INWARD AND BACK, the 1911 board concluded that a mine had detonated under the magazine, causing the explosion that destroyed the ship.”  (Emphasis mine.)

Thus, while it is true that Rickover’s book claims that spontaneous combustion in the coal bunker caused the explosion, that claim remains, as noted, inconclusive.

Peace.

the whole epic is laid out in this 45-min. choreodrama - not a polemic - an “Iliad” for our time - as much for scholars a millennia from now

http://amazing-visions.com/Pf_TF_files/TheFall-wDancers.mov

notes here http://www.thefall01.info/

John Hanks:

While it is true that the document presaging 9/11 (“Rebuilding America’s Defenses”) was created by the neocon think tank PNAC, it is, sadly, incorrect to blame only Republicans for 9/11.  Yes, it was most likely the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Rice/et al squad that was most complicit.  But there were many Democrats who were complicit either directly or by their silence.  And, of course, members of BOTH parties are complicit by their CONTINUED silence.

The 9/11 Commission had both Republicans and Democrats - ALL of whom had serious conflicts of interest vis-a-vis the investigation.  So the 9/11 Commission whitewash can be blamed on both parties equally.

Thus, the entire 9/11 fiasco, while perhaps originally planned by neocon elements, was ultimately carried out and then covered up by BOTH parties.

Peace.

Da Bronx:

“The USS MAINE sunk as a result of a coal bunker fire adjacent to one of its ammunition magazines. Pure accident, nothing else.”

Actually, that is only one of two theories, neither of which have been conclusively proven.  The other is that the explosion of a mine in the harbor caused the ammunition magazines to explode: this theory is supported by many who claim to have heard TWO explosions, not just one.  The mine explosion theory then lends itself to a number of possible interpretations, including that the mine was deliberately set, either by the Cubans/Spanish or (for conspiracy theorists) by the U.S. itself as a “false flag” operation that it then blamed on the Cubans/Spanish.

Peace.

RE: The USS MAINE sunk as a result of a coal bunker fire adjacent to one of its ammunition magazines, pure accident, nothing else

Too bad Hurst didn’t report it like that, might have avoided the gruesome tragedy that followed. Not every hegemonic regime is lucky enough to have handed it a Maine - why this one needed a New Pearl Harbor…or perhaps better characterized as a New Gulf of Tonkin.

All”

Some 911 Truth-related news.

First, former president Jimmy Carter has become the most recent major public figure to support a new investigation into the events of 9/11.  He joins such notables as Gen. Wesley Clark, Lt. Col. Robert Bowman, Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, Michael Moore, Martin Sheen, Willie Nelson, Lou Dobbs, Peter Jennings, Naomi Wolf, Ralph Nader, and hundreds of senior military, intelligence, law enforcement and goverment officials, as well as engineers, architects, pilots, aviation professionals, media professionals, academicians, artists, entertainers, and many 9/11 survivors and family members. (See http://www.patriotsquestion911.com).

Second, actor Daniel Sunjata (a full-throated 9/11 Truth movement member) has convinced the producers of the FX TV series “Rescue Me” to do an episode that suggests that 9/11 was an inside job.  For those who may not know, 9/11 was not only the impetus for the series, but has been discussed or mentioned numerous times.  This will be the first time - and the first time ever on a major TV series - that the idea that 9/11 was an inside job will be seriously considered.  The episode will be aired sometime after April 2009.  Bravo to Daniel!

Finally, there is an excellent new radio program called “9/11 Truth or Consequences,” hosted by the founder of NY911Truth (of which I am a member).  It can be heard on Internet radio on Tuesday evenings from ~7pm to 8pm EST (Internet radio times vary by a few minutes, so it may not start right on time).  Go to http://www.therealpublicradio.net and click on “Click to Listen.”

The truth will out!

Peace.

John:

“What’s not to know about 9/11? What gaps exist? 19 Muslim terrorists hijacked 4 jumbo jets and killed about 3,000 people in NYC, DC, Pennsylvania.”

Are you listening to yourself?  Is that what you call “Occam’s Razor?”  Well, sorry buddy, but Occam’s Razor is sometimes as dull as the edge of a dime.

If what you say is true, I have just a few small queries:

-“19 Muslim terrorists…”  First, the only “proof” we have that they were “Muslim” was a single alleged phone call from Barbara Olson to her husband Ted Olson (who was at the time a member of the Bush administration, and a personal friend of Bush) from Flight 77 in which she told him that the “hijackers” were “Middle Eastern” (NOT “Muslim”).  It was also in this alleged phone call that she told him they were carrying “plastic knives and boxcutters.”  The only problem is: this call never happened.  And this was confirmed by the FBI itself, who checked the cellphone records and found that while there was an attempted call from her cellphone to his, it did not connect.  They also found that the airphones on that plane were not working.  So the only “proof” that (i) there were hijackers, (ii) they were Middle Eastern, and (iii) they were carrying “knives and boxcutters” never happened.  And then there is the question as to why, if there were “19 Muslim terrorists,” AT LEAST five of them showed up very much alive only months later.

-”...hijacked 4 jumbo jets…”  If so, why were their names not on the passenger manifests?  This was confirmed by both the FAA and the FBI.  As well, there is still serious question as to what actually hit the Pentagon, as well as the field in Shanksville.

Two other small facts are worth noting.  First, the FBI “Most Wanted” poster of OBL does NOT include the 9/11 attacks because, according to an FBI spokesperson, “there is no hard evidence linking bin Laden to those attacked.  Second, the two co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission (Tom Kean and Lee Hamilton) admit in their book that they (i) did not get all the evidence they asked for or needed, and (ii) the Report was thus “incomplete” since the Bush administration stonewalled them continuously.

So there is PLENTY to “know about 9/11” because ENORMOUS “gaps exist.”  Not least is the Physics 101 of the collapse of the WTC towers (and WTC 7), the “official story” of which simply cannot withstand scrutiny.

Peace.

RE: By John, February 5 at 10:34 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

You conspiracy jerks can come back to reality now that Obama’s been elected…

Sorry, John, Obama is just the current shill in a long line of shills - he shills the 9/11 myth right along with the rest of them. Take that under consideration when contemplating your reality.

Bottom line is this: The 9/11 coup d’état is an open secret in corridors of power the world over, but the MSM psy-op/cover-up is complete. As to how this works, we needn’t even speculate. We have it from the source, in two concise lines:

1. “Deception is a state of mind and the mind of the state.” - James Jesus Angelton - Director of CIA Counter Intelligence (1954-74)

2. “The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media.” - William Colby - Director of the CIA (1973-76)

How can we hope to understand this without understanding the permanent nature of the miliatary and intel. buraucrcies.  James W. Douglass does this as never before in the ecellent new book JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and WHy It Matters.

Among the rave reviews, Daniel Ellsbergs states that it basically convinced him that there was in fact a conspiracy.  Also endoresed by Marcus Raskin and Richard Falk.  As much about Cold War History as abou the conspiracy.

Wars are usually started out of cowardice and fear.  The cowardice and fear is generated by crooks who need a war for commercial or imperialist racket reasons.  They are basically protection rackets. 

I do think Zionists have a lot of power over our finance and media.  However, that power is permitted to them by sociopaths who use Zionists as patsies.  Zionists are willing to commit any crime or treachery to back their cause, just like Cuban exiles.  The Republicans have taken advantage of that.

A very good resource with summarized 9/11 information including a/v clips and information from Cooperative Research’s “Complete 9/11 Timeline” can be found on the website “Get Up To Speed, Fast” at the following url:

http://www.getuptospeedfast.com/911/index.php

All:

Senator Mike Gravel has officially joined the effort to get a 9/11 Ballot Initiative on the ballot in NYC!  As a member of the sponsoring organization (NY911Truth), I am thrilled with this development.  And he made the announcement on no less a distinguished program than Democracy Now:

http://www.democracynow.org/2008/6/17/former_senator_mike_gravel_calls_for

If you live in NYC, join us!

Peace.

Jingles:

“At least with Obama—- he will pander to the black community instead of Israel firsters.”

Not so.  In fact, of the three remaining candidates (Obama, Clinton, McCain), Obama’s speech to AIPAC was arguably the MOST pandering.  (All of the speeches are available online.)

As well, let’s not forget that, even without a conspiracy theory, the influence of CFR, TC and Bilderberg on the U.S. presidency and government is very real and very broad.  In this regard, Obama is CFR, and his wife is actually director of the local Chicago CFR chapter.  As well, his top foreign affairs advisor (Brzezinski) is all three (CFR, TC, Bilderberg), and about 1/3 od his inner circle advisors are CFR and/or TC.

The more things change, the more they stay the same…

Peace.

Maani,

Their shameless barefaced audacity knows no bounds… take Cheney’s recent straight-faced comments concerning the 4000 US dead service men and women since the Iraq War commenced: “The president carries the biggest burden, obviously, ... He’s the one who has to make the decision to commit young Americans, but we are fortunate to have a group of men and women, the all-volunteer force, who voluntarily put on the uniform and go in harm’s way for the rest of us.”

Well how ‘bout that…

Cheney on Iraq: ‘It’s Important to Win’
http://abcnews.go.com/WN/Politics/story?id=4513250&page=1

“I wouldn’t trust either of them to cook my lunch, much less run my life!”

Conservative Yankee,

To be honest and fair about it I need to retract the, “Not that Obama’s any better…” flippant remark I made earlier (wasn’t thinking straight). Obama’s “A More Perfect Union” speech ( http://tinyurl.com/2qorn9 ) at Constitution Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, March 18, 2008 now referred to as the “Obama race speech” really did contain some very powerful truths that underline why Pastor Jeremiah Wright felt motivated to blurt out those so-called “outrageous comments” that he did and we saw get frenzied media coverage worldwide. The media coverage really was a well-executed and orchestrated exercise in discrediting Obama’s credentials for not only his party’s nomination but to also say to all he’d be an unfit person because of his association with Wright to become President of the U.S. of A. 

There was also quite a distorted attack directed at Obama down here in Australia courtesy of our national “unbiased fair-down-the-middle” free-to-air/taxpayer-funded broadcaster the ABC, that had several of us spitting chips after it aired. Not once does the Lateline presenter or his guest Hitchens refer to anything of substance that Obama spoke about in his speech (forget the transcript as it’s riddled with errors):

Christopher Hitchens on the US Presidential race (24/03/2008)
http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200803/r234920_944036.asx

All:

Two things.  First, check this out: it was not enough for Silverstein to get insurance (some $7 billion or so) based on “two separate attacks” on the towers, now he is suing the airlines, the airports and the airport security companies for an ADDITIONAL $12.5 BILLION dollars!

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/27/nyregion/27rebuild.html?_r=1&sq=hartocollis&st=nyt&oref=slogin&scp=1&pagewanted=print

Also, for those who are registered to vote in NY, there is a ballot initiative to open a new, non-political, THOROUGH investigation into 9/11.  To read about this - and sign the petition (but ONLY if you are registered to vote in NY), go to:

http://www.nyc911initiative.org/

Peace!

Maani:

“Is Hillary the only candidate likely to call for and institute a new, thorough, non-political investigation into the attacks of 9/11?”

Let’s not hold our breath:

Mike Gravel Exposes Clinton & Obama on Iran, Hillary Cackles
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3gQfz8GC0o&NR=1

How is Clinton a fit woman to govern a country? Not that Obama’s any better…

“Is Hillary the only candidate likely to call for and institute a new, ‘thorough, non-political investigation’ into the attacks of 9/11?

“As absurd as that might sound [right on], consider that one of her top advisors (and possible VP nominee if she wins the nomination) - Gen. Wesley Clark (of all people) - is supporting the national movement for just such an investigation!”

Please, such comments are dangerous in the extreme - I nearly fell off my swivel chair (admittedly an el-cheapo brand) and broke a leg in the process laughing as hard as I was…

Did you happen to read Rev Wright’s comments? I thought at last we’re getting somewhere, then realised he’s come up way short… doesn’t even mention the 9/11 false flag atrocity orchestrated by Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Co; talks instead about Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Ancient history.

http://tinyurl.com/33zjx4

Hillary? What’s she ever going to do for the country? Sweet bugger all just as her hubby did. (He shoulda stuck to his saxophone, and promiscuous women. ‘Bout all he was ever good for.)

Llan:

Although I agree with you, there is actually a better way to approach this.  I have used it for some time, and recently heard David Ray Griffin use it as well.

The phrase “conspiracy theory” consists of two words: “conspiracy” - which is when two or more people plan a particular action, usually illegal in nature - and “theory,” which is a belief supported by evidence.

In this regard, the “official story” of 9/11 is as much a “conspiracy theory” as are alternative theories (the preferred phrase).  The government has a “theory” that there was a “conspiracy” (by bin Laden and members of Al Qaeda) to hijack airliners and fly them into certain buildings.  The supporting evidence for their “theory” is The 9/11 Commission Report.

It is that simple.  The government has one “conspiracy theory,” and alternative theorists have others.  There is no need to quash the phrase “conspiracy theory” as long as everyone understands that the “official story” is one as well.

And, of course, a theory is only as good as its supporting evidence.  In this regard, given the errors and omissions in the Report - and conflicts of interest of most of the commissioners - and some of the newer revelations that undermine the Report, it is becoming increasingly compromised, thus making it less and less supportive of the government’s “conspiracy theory.”

As an aside, for all of you who live in NYC, you can now sign on to a proposed ballot initiative that would create a new, thorough, non-political investigation into the attacks of 9/11.  Information can be found here:

http://www.nyc911initiative.org

Peace.

Is Hillary the only candidate likely to call for and institute a new, thorough, non-political investigation into the attacks of 9/11?

As absurd as that might sound, consider that one of her top advisors (and possible VP nominee if she wins the nomination) - Gen. Wesley Clark (of all people) - is supporting the national movement for just such an investigation!

See the following site:

http://patriotsquestion911.com/

Peace.

All:

Superb, spectacular, must-read article!

http://www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=8165

Peace.

And, of course, it is the Republican/Libertarian Ron Paul who is the only candidate calling for a new, thorough, non-political investigation into 9/11, following ALL the evidence no matter WHERE it leads…

Peace.

Jojo:

Actually, concrete doesn’t “melt”: the silicon fuses at high temperatures, starting at just over 2500 degrees F.  “Fire brick” (an insulating material not used on the twin towers) “melts” at just over 3000 degrees F.

Still, the fusing of the concrete and the metal in the guns is certainly indicative of remarkably high temperatures, given that jet diesel fuel burns at a hgh temperature of 1800 degrees F.

Thermite (or thermate)?  Most likely.

Good call.

Peace.

All:

Check this out!!!

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/013108N.shtml

(Thanks to TruthDig poster 911truthdotorg for this citation.)

Peace.

Whenever the right wing commits a crime, they accuse the left of it as a crooked diversion.  They are basically human filth.  I only listen to them when I want to collect some more lies. 

To get into the Pearl Harbor question, I would have to deal with it like an obsessive hobby for a long time.  I have plenty of those already. 

Oddly enough the next model I am working on is one of the Arizona, which I am trying to fudge into a plausible representation of the Wyoming. 

I have read some of the books and seen the movies over the years as a matter of course.  I just find it easier to believe that FDR was a victim of the usual right-wing smears than to believe that he encouraged the Pearl Harbor attack. 

Do Republicans have a monopoly on pretexts for war?  Probably not.  But, they come darn close to it.  They are and have always been vicious criminals.

Hetzer:

It is not a matter of “winning.”  After all, we will never REALLY know, with certainty, what happened in any of these cases.

As an aside, there are actually more left and center writers who believe that PH was a false flag operation than there are righties.  Indeed, it is odd you blame it on righties when Prange himself was right-wing.

Peace.

The right wing started with the Roosevelt conspiracy stuff right away, and I just don’t believe anything that comes from them given their long criminal record.  It it turns out that there really is solid proof that FDR went along with the attack, I would admit it.  I simply assume that our system elevates criminals to top positions and FDR could be one in the long line of them.  So you win.

It is probably more important to deal with the vicious filth that we have to deal with today.  Then we can deal with Roosevelt the next time a book comes out.  (I will not ordinarily read right-wing books because they are always written by propagandists.)

Not that we needed more confirmation, since this is already well-known, but…

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/01/09/6264/

Peace.

Hetzer:

As I have noted to others, one cannot rely on a single source, no matter how seemingly “authoritative” it is.  And as someone who has read widely on this, I can tell you that “At Dawn We Slept” is NOT authoritative on the subject.

Rather, what I have gathered by reading numerous books, articles, etc., finding common threads, and reading between the lines, is quite different.

We start from the presumption that Roosevelt was looking for a way into the war, primarily to fight Hitler.  But American support for entering the war was low; ~85% were against it up to December 6th. Note also that Roosevelt was aware of the military pact between Germany and Japan, so he knew that if he could not engage Hitler directly, he could engage Japan and use the pact between them as an excuse to go after Hitler as well.  Here is the timeline:

-The Japanese “Enigma” code was broken in later Winter/early Spring of 1941.  However, since we did not tell them we had broken it, they continued using it.

-Sometime in late Summer/early Fall of 1941, a message was intercepted noting a planned attack on a “U.S. naval installation” “in the near future.”

Here the threads diverge slightly, and there are two schools of thought:

(a) Roosevelt assumed it would be Guam, since it was closer to Japan.  Those who support this theory say that Roosevelt might have been willing to sacrifice all or most of the minimal personnel and materiel at Guam in order to have his excuse to enter the war.

(b) Roosevelt knew it would be PH.  Those who support this theory point to the fact that (i) Roosevelt moved all the major ships in the fleet (particularly aircraft carriers) out of PH only weeks prior to the attack; and (ii) most of the personnel at PH were on shore leave (away from the ships), and would be out of harm’s way.

In either event, we know that immediately after the attack, American support for entering the war was over 90% - and December 8th saw the creation of the largest volunteer army ever created: over 1 million men enlisted.

As noted, it is always dangerous to use a single source to support ANYTHING.  One might was well say the Warren Commission Report and the 9/11 Commission Report are “authoritative” on their subjects.  Both were whitewashes of the highest order.  For goodness sake, while I am not suggest that ATWS is a whitewash, Prange was a career Navy officer.  Do you really think he would EVER suggest that PH was “allowed” to happen?

Peace.

I think that both Pearl Harbor and the soldier spitting stuff were right wing smears.  At Dawn We Slept is authoritative on Pearl Harbor.  Common sense says that people didn’t stand around waiting to spit on Vietnam soldiers.  It may have happened once in the Oakland terminal.  The right wing in this country does not hesitate to tell malicious lies.  It is their life.  They are crooks and racketeers.

All thing evil are possible, but it just doesn’t ring true.  I have heard that the French asked Eisenhower to use nuclear bombs on Dien Bien Phu, but Eisenhower said no.  (I’ve read some other versions.)

Take a look at the website “Get Up To Speed, Fast,” a new website with a comprehensive article summarizing issues about the 9/11 attacks as well as other important political topics..

http://www.GetUpToSpeedFast.com/911/

.

Vietnam - “the 10,000 day war”....

By Maani, January 1: “I have recently heard that the battle of Dien Bien Phu (1954) was a French “false flag” operation in which the French deliberately air-bombed their own special forces in order to have an excuse to pull out of Vietnam…. Can anyone shed light on this theory?”

By Conservative Yankee, January 1: “The PBS has a relatively accurate depiction of Vietnam the 10,000 day war”..... The French did not need a false flag event to leave Vietnam. Their people were tired of the endless drain of monetary resources, and returning dead….”

Considering that, like Iraq, the millions of dead and suffering make the losses of the French or the USA and its allies insignificant. The only real “Vietnam war heros” I know are all Vietnamese, uhh - and they all called it “the American war”.

One was a woman whose father was somebody in the South Vietnamese army. She was a spy but latterly worked for the Americans and carried a pistol. These people have the most interesting stories of all for obvious reasons.

Better to search “Viet Minh” while you look at the French involvement which goes back to “helping” the Japanese run the country when they took over. Much is in French language, if you’re serious… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4Ggih20lpc

Don’t forget, though, that nothing stopped there (in 1975) for the Vietnamese. Apart from the Southern refugees, the new regime had war with Cambodia and then another with China. Search “Sino-Vietnamese War” or “China Vietnam War” on YouTube

In the end, they made as much a mess of all the places the USA never reached http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZd3k24STnA&feature=related but a lot of the video on the net is from the Chinese PLA.

Hetzer:

I agree: the propaganda aspect of the “quiet coup” IS impressive.  Sadly and dangerously so.  As you well know, continued repetition of a lie creates a perception of truth; a good example is that 17% of Americans STILL believe there was a connection between Iraq and 9/11 - despite the fact that (i) none of the “hijackers” (if such they were) were Iraqi, (ii) there was no Al Qaeda activity in Iraq PRIOR to our invasion, (iii) Bin Laden HATED Hussein, so there was no love lost there, and (iv) all the lies re an Iraq/9-11 connection were debunked completely and thoroughly by both the alternative AND mainstream media.

There is an old joke that goes: “How do you know when so-and-so is lying?  His lips are moving.”  Bush is probably the first person I have ever seen for whom this is literally true.  If you want to know what Bush will do, listen to what he says and you can predict with absolute certainty that he will DO exactly the opposite.  And yet people still take him at his word.

Everything Bush & Co. have done has been to (i) centralize power in the executive, and (ii) subtly undermine specific historical “safeguards” that will allow them to take actions that would never have been permitted in the past.  Some examples (and consider how these fit together): a sitting president can now unilaterally declare any person - including Americans - an “enemy combatant,” leading to up to three years of incarceration without access to family or lawyers; suspension of habeus corpus in cases of terrorism or “national security” (a dangerously broad term); a contract between the government and Blackwater (yes, them) that allows Blackwater to “assist” during “disasters and national emergencies”; and undermining the Posse Comitatus Act, which now allows a sitting president to declare martial law without the consent of Congress.

Now add to this the “Homeland Terrorism Act,” a bill before the Senate (already passed by the House) that is in direct contravention of the DOI, which would, among other things, make certain speech or other dissent “treasonous.”

Here is a prediction made by myself and others based on the above.

In order to complete the “quiet coup,” Bush & Co. obviously have to figure out a way to retain power, despite the upcoming elections.  Since we know that they are capable of “false flag” operations (9/11), here is how it might occur.

A month or two prior to the election in November, there is a “terrorist attack” (false flag) at least as big, if not bigger, than 9/11.  Perhaps in NYC again, perhaps in multiple cities in the U.S.  It could be biological, chemical, or even nuclear.  It will likely kill and injure many times more people than 9/11.

The Bush Administration can then declare martial law under the guise of a “national emergency,” bringing in both the National Guard and Blackwater to enforce it, and suspend the elections.  Anyone dissenting from this would risk being arrested - perhaps as an “enemy combatant,” or perhaps accused of “treason.”  In either case, since habeus corpus would be suspended, there would be no legal recourse for these people.

Think it can’t happen here?  Think again.  Bush & Co. have quietly and successful set up everything they need to do this.  If the “Homeland Terrorism” Act is passed, that would complete the puzzle, allowing Bush to do exactly what is suggested above.

Peace.  (Maybe.)

It is all the advance planning and crooks without borders aspects.  Above all the media manipulation is impressive.

Hetzer:

Well, while I dislike the Bushies as much as you, it is something of hyperbole to compare them to Stalin and Hitler - yet.  Stalin murdered or caused to die ~50 million.  Hitler, ~11 million.  I doubt the number is that high for the Bushies.

What IS happening is that the Bushies are “taking a page” (or two) from the Stalin-Hitler Handbook on Centralizing Power and Creating a Fascist or Totalitarian State.

What is occurring in America is what is referred to as a “quiet coup” - one that need not include the military or any “force” at all: just the willing acquiescence of the populace.  And by creating a climate of fear via a never-ending “war on terror” (direct from Orwell), and using provenly successful propaganda techniques, that acquiescence is already occurring.

Peace.

The crookedness and evil of the Busheviks is so extensive that I would call it a world wide movement.  It could have started before Reagan was president.  They haven’t murdered as many people yet, but their machinations extend way beyond a Stalin or a Hitler.

FYI:

http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bin/blogs/voices.php/2007/12/21/p21997

I’m not saying I buy this, but at least it is coming closer to the truth…

I have recently heard that the battle of Dien Bien Phu (1954) was a French “false flag” operation in which the French deliberately air-bombed their own special forces in order to have an excuse to pull out of Vietnam.

Can anyone shed light on this theory?

Thanks.

CY:

As noted in the link, it is the “venerable” New York Times…

Peace.

Sam & All:

The Bhutto assassination is now being compared - in the mainstream press, no less - with the assassination of JFK.  Consider: open car, three shots fired, “kill shot” was a head wound, person next to her injured, initial “lone gunman” theory, mishandling of body/autopsy, removal of evidence prior to formal investigation…the list goes on.

Here is one mainstream report on the autopsy angle:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/world/asia/31examiners.html?pagewanted=print

Maani

(Pssst, it’s me “sam”. Seems someone else is using the “sam” moniker as well so i’m registered now as “sam brown”—through lack of imagination. I’d suggest you register too to avoid confusion.)

“Hey, everybody—have you heard the news? It seems that the assassination of Benazir Bhutto was carried out by…Al Qaeda! Yup!”

Did you happen to hear over the airwaves in recent days that al-Qaeda’s second in command, former eye surgeon (turned freedom fighter—or whatever he is) Dr Ayman al-Zawahiri is inviting questions from journalists and members of the public alike?

Tracked it down, read this:

“Zawahiri invites media questions”
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/AD505614-009E-4C5D-9AE6-854538C9380A.htm?FRAMELESS=true&NRNODEGUID;={AD505614-009E-4C5D-9AE6-854538C9380A}

Remember Bush at one stage wanted/contemplated having—you know, when he puts on that real sneaky mischievous “I avoided Nam but you didn’t sucker, ‘cause my daddy wus President” grin—the air force direct a few DU-tipped missiles Al Jarzeera News’ way? Would his mate Murdoch have been tickled pink or what…

#122431 by Maani on 12/25: “...at least two (and I think three) high-level people who at least should have known more, and might well have been complicit, were given the Medal of Freedom…”

Freedom is NOT a piece of metal, uhh!