Habeus Corpus...
posted by Patrick J. Fitzgerald at 12/07/2006
Dec 7, 2006
About Me
- Name: Patrick J. Fitzgerald
- Location: U.S. Attorney On Assignment - WDC, Illinois, United States
Think Globally Prosecute Locally - I grew up in Flatbush, kept my nose clean, went to law school. Now that I am in Chicago and D.C. I have found that the rampant graft and corruption to be a travesty - a travesty of a mockery of a sham of a mockery of a travesty of two mockeries of a sham. ---Favorite quote --- "Conditional love is an oxymoron." - Yours truly
Previous Posts
- Very Interesting...
- Achoooooooooooo...!
- TGIM...
- How To Win Friends And Influence People...
- Pizza Hut $5 Medium Pizzas...
- Happy Saturday...
- In This Holiday Season...
- Holiday Menu For The Troops...
- Di Fi Aye Aye..!
- Easy Does It..?
94 Comments:
Among those he appointed were Simone Ledeen—the daughter of conservative pundit Michael Ledeen—who, though she "lacked experience managing the finances of a large organization," was hired to take control of the Iraqi budget, and Jay Hallen, a White House job applicant, who with no finance experience was hired to head the reopening of the Iraqi stock exchange.
Gates Appointment- the daughter of the Plame Letter FRAUD, Micheal Ledeen (On RawStory)
Let's arrest Chimpy for his war crimes, lock him up and take away his habeous corpus, but restore everybody else's. We could make him the new man without a country.We'll set him up on a remote island. We could call it Monkey Island.We could send that baboon Cheney there too. And that ring-tailed monkey Coni Rice.
"And that ring-tailed monkey Coni Rice".
LOL! Hee Hee Hee!
on and on...sheesh...simple physics folks.
but throw in bush and jews and it's it hopeless with this crowd here.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ever played billiards, anon, at 10.23?
What happens when a moving billiard ball hits a stationary ball?
There is a transfer of some of the kinetic energy from the moving ball to the stationary ball and from the rest of the kinetic energy into sound energy, as a result of which the stationary billiard ball begins to move and you hear the click of billiard ball impacting against billiard ball.
Is the transfer of energy immediate or does it take place over a miniscule period of time?
The latter, anon. It’s simple physics!
Now transfer that principal to what happened on 9/11
The twin towers, and WTC7, fell into their own footprint at freefall speed.
We are told that this was due to the force of gravity alone.
Now when high-rise buildings collapse, they pancake. That is, one floor falls onto another, there is a pause, then the other floor falls, and so on, like billiard balls hitting billiard balls.
For a building with as many floors as the twin towers to fall due to the force of gravity alone, it takes much longer than the time it took the twin towers to fall, and the twin towers didn’t pancake.
They were pulverised.
Concrete can only be pulverised if very powerful explosives are used.
In addition, they fell at free-fall speed. That can only happen if there is little impediment to the falling floors beneath them. The speed at which the twin towers fell is consistent with it having been a controlled demolition.
In addition, why the pyroclastic clouds which are a feature of volcanic eruptions and highly powerful explosions?
If the steel of the twin towers melted in the heat, then why the photographs of survivors standing at the hole made by the plane waiting to be rescued?
The twin towers were built to withstand the impact of a plane.
We are expected to believe that, for the first time in the history of modern civilization, three high rise buildings collapsed as a result of fire, and one of these buildings wasn’t even hit by a plane.
This did not happen to the Sears Building in Chicago when it caught fire.
If you want to discuss physics, go to Dr Judy Woods article on the scholars for 9/11 truth website.
9/11: A Refutation of the Official Collapse Theory
An article by Dr Judy Wood in which she argues that gravity alone cannot account for the speed at which the Twin Towers collapsed. For the Twin Towers to have collapsed at the speed at which they did and in the way that they did can only be explained by controlled demolition.
Here’s the link:
http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/BilliardBalls.html
You will find further stuff on my blogsite.
anon at 2:01 said:
WTC 7 Collapse
CLAIM: Seven hours after the two towers fell, the 47-story WTC 7 collapsed. According to 911review.org: "The video clearly shows that it was not a collapse subsequent to a fire, but rather a controlled demolition: amongst the Internet investigators, the jury is in on this one."
FACT: (read on GEF)
http://www.popularmechanics
.com/technology/military_
law/1227842.html?page=5
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Earlier this year, a small group of brave young twenty-somethings living in New York State made the video "Loose Change" on a laptop. You can view it for free here:
http://video.google.com/videoredirect?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.loosechange911.com&chan=Uploaded&prog=Loose+Change+2nd+Edition+Recut&date=Wednesday%2C+August+16%2C+2006+7%3A00%3A00+AM+GMT
On September 11th, 2006 Dylan Avery and Jason Bermas, the makers of the video "Loose Change" appeared on "Democracy Now! the War and Peace Report", to debate James Meigs and David Dunbar, two editors of Popular Mechanics and the book Debunking 9/11 Myths.
The editors of Popular Mechanics refused to address the issues and resorted to ad hominem attacks on the makers of "Loose Change".
Read the transcript of the debate:
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/09/11/1345203
So much for the editors of Popular Mechanics.
Fitz:
From your article..
"While the measure to restore the right of habeas corpus has almost no chance of passing before Congress adjourns later this week, the message is clear: When Democrats take over in early January, the issue could resurface."
Hey CalamityJane:
I really like your idea of sending the gerbil, baron, shug, et al to a remote island..let's send scooter too..he can claim memory loss there! Here's a quarter..call someone who cares!
ROFLMAO
hello all,
I want my costitution back now!
my assoc and I just picked up another investigation job;-) t-via pda
GEF, you must watch this! How to deal with a telemarketer was priceless. This is even funnier and had me in stitches. I don’t laugh often, but last night I couldn’t stop laughing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wei3-NhknCk&mode=related&search=
Most of the American sit-coms, with canned laughter, which they show on TV here in the UK are crap.
But American political satire at its best is without rival.
See also:
Surprise appearance by Vice-President Dick Cheney at annual White House Easter Egg Roll
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-wOJAL0vJA&mode=related&search=
t at 2:45 PM said:
Anthony-do you know if silverstein filed paperwork for demolition of building 7-and wouldn't he have had to-even if after the fact to collect insurance? Fire dept and police logs might note such info too.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Interesting question t. I don't know the answer to that one. Why don't you investigate? FI wouldn't know where to start on that one.
BTW, I've always wondered whether the insurers of the twin towers who contested silverstein's claim that what happened on 9/11 was two seperate events, so he could claim double on the insurance, would sue silverstein for reress if they found out what really happened on 9/11 and that he was somehow involved.
SQ
January is just around the corner.
I can't wait to say Happy New Year...
You will find further stuff on my blogsite.
12:02 PM
Thanks, Anthony.
It's great to live in a country and be free to believe the "truth".
Hi geezerpower!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
GEEZERPOWER said...
anthony said...
EXHIBIT C (cont)
II. Why Did the Twin Towers and Building 7 of the WTC Collapse?
I think you're onto somehing...
Maybe that's why Dubya didn't want an investigation?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Commission which investigated 9/11 was chaired by an "insider" and presented selected evidence and ignored the kind of questions which are being raised now.
The Official Report on 9/11 is a largely fictional.
Here in the UK, we have had to wait nearly ten years for an investigation into the death of Princess Diana and witnesses in that investigation are being intimidated.
Likewise, there was not a proper investigation into the death (apparent suicide) of Dr David Kelly, the WMD expert who went to the press with the intelligence community's concern about the integrity of some of the intelligence which Tony Blair used to sex up his dossier on WMDS.
Kelly's death is now being investigated by Liberal Democrat MP, Kenneth Baker, who spoke on Alex Jones radio show during the summer.
I will continue to post EXHIBITS from Paul Mitchell's VERIFIED CRIMINAL COMPLAIN, ON INFORMATION after I have had my dinner.
Anthony Loose Change is a totally descredted amatuer effort also by the "other camp". I am not referring to Bushites either. I've read it all, seen it all and find no explosive evidence to be seen yet. As for Thermite it will not "cut" controllably as many seem to think it will also.
There is a simple law in physics concerning "static force/dynamic force" and you can see how this is applied to the falling of the towers. "Free fall" has been shown not to be in the equation too...that concept is very misunderstood.
Now surely you have seen videos of demolished larged buildings? The huge dust clouds are not created by many small carefully placed charges but the crushing of the concrete. Happens all the time. In the towers dust clouds....consider the tons of gypsum board used for interior walls throughout each level...it has the consistancy of chalk.
The unfortunate (the most heart wrenching photos imo and i do look at that often) seen before the fall you mentioned did not die because of melted steel but weakened steel...as in when a blacksmith heats steel for working to shapes...it is soft and malleable but not near anywhere near to melting. Consider the toweres unusual construction...they were not of the typical girder webs running throught each level but a new concept of mainly exterior support that joined on each level with the typical heavy I-Beam girders of the elevators shaft supports. You can see the these "corrugated" exterior sections in great piles in wreckage photos...they were what gave out.
Anthony use your apparent intelligence and sift through all this unfounded tomfoolery and find out lack of verifible scintifically evidence as I did. At one time i was buying into it all also and had let my dislike of NeoCons cloud my decisions. So some Germans said otherwise? So did whackjob Chavez. LOL
The Popular Mechanics article was blamed on Jews way back yes i know..that's to be expected...
the debate goes on and there are many scientists that will and will not go political on this...it needs careful sifting, however...most of the conspiracy theoies fall apart when confronted rationally. What happened to the "all the jews in the towers took the day off" sick postings all over the web? It has been completely proven wrong and was made up by bigots...so watch that madness..it's out there still in other forms.
i'm just sayin'...
http://forum.physorg.com
/index.phps=4e3ccac1e912dd
38cdaab9a72a112a2b&showtopic
=7444&st=2955&#entry125009
on the subject of Habeus Corpus...
Military Commissions Act: A Precursor To Tyranny?
Chuck Baldwin http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/chuckwagon.html
Wednesday, December 6, 2006
In an interview with nationally syndicated radio talk show host Alex Jones, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas recently discussed President Bush's support for the Military Commissions Act. During the interview, Paul said that "the law officially allows for citizen concentration camp facilities."
Paul also warned that "the Military Commissions Act and the Defense Authorization Act . . . essentially wipes out Habeas Corpus."
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2006/061206Commissions.htm http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2006/061206Commissions.htm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Seems that Ron Paul is a good man who has gained the trust of Alex Jones who deeply mistrusts politicians, whether neo-cons or Democrats.
meant to say there is wealth of good argument on that physics forum and there's many more one like on the web...you have to get away from plethora of political oriented ones.
"it has been completely proven wrong"
No, it never has been proven wrong and you as well as the Megaphones are still trying to prove it wrong.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc_charges.html
Never proven wrong
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/motherofallscandals.html
Never proven wrong
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8172271955308136871
Never proven wrong
Why did he say pull it when there was no one in the building?
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/911security.html
None have ever been proven wrong
The neocon zionists enacted 9-11, and none of their media has ever been able to prove the story wrong.
seems like I'm not going to get my supper after all.
I'll get back to you on the physics, especially on what has been said concerning the structure of the Twin Towers, some time later, anon at 12:58.
In the meantime, some more tomfools for you:
MIT’s Jeff King:9/11WTC Collapse Was Controlled Demolition
MIT engineer and research scientist Jeff King details how the official government story violates the laws of physics and chemistry. He goes on to explain how the subsequent government investigations were designed NOT to uncover what happened. He also provides insight into what most likely happened that day.
Watch it on google
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8533904938803031452
or on youtube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FujppU50EpA&mode=related&search
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Senior Military, Intelligence, and Government Officials Question 9/11 Commission Report
Many respected senior members of the U.S. military, intelligence services, and government have expressed significant criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report. Some even allege government complicity in the terrible acts of 9/11. Below are the highly revealing statements on this vital topic of over 50 prominent public servants with links for verification and further investigation.
The collective voices of these respected senior officials give credibility to the claim that the 9/11 Commission Report is tragically flawed. These dedicated individuals from both political parties cannot be simply dismissed as irresponsible believers in some 9/11 conspiracy theory. Their sincere concern, backed by decades of service to their country, demonstrate that criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report is not only reasonable and responsible, it is in fact a patriotic duty.
http://www.wanttoknow.info/officialsquestion911commissionreport
Former Bush official says 9/11 an "inside job"!
Morgan Reynolds, PhD, Chief Economist, Department of Labor under George W. Bush 2001-2002, Former Director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis, Professor Emeritus, Texas A&M University, says 9/11 an “inside job”.
Video: "I first began to suspect that 9/11 was in inside job when the Bush-Cheney Administration invaded Iraq. … We can prove that the government’s story is false."
http://video... - Free video presentation of Dr. Reynolds
Essay: "It is hard to exaggerate the importance of a scientific debate over the cause(s) of the collapse of the twin towers and building 7. The job of scientists, engineers and impartial researchers everywhere is to get the scientific and engineering analysis of 9/11 right. Unfortunately, getting it right in today’s 'security state' demands daring because explosives and structural experts have been intimidated in their analyses of the collapses of 9/11."
http://www.lewrockwell.com/...
Website: http://nomoregames.net
Bio: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgan_Reynolds
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Former German Minister: "9/11 run by Bush Administration"
Former German Minister of Defense Says Building 7 Used To Run 9/11 Attack, Guide the planes in, then destroy the crime scene.
Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones/Prison Planet.com April 21 2006
Former Helmut Schmidt cabinet member, 25-year German Parliamentarian and global intelligence expert Andreas Von Bülow says that the 9/11 attack was run by the highest levels of the US intelligence apparatus using WTC Building 7 as a command bunker which was later demolished in order to destroy the crime scene.
Read the article
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2006/210406runattack.htm
or watch the interview:
http://www.prisonplanet.tv/audio/200406vonbuelow.htm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Andreas von Bülow Interview:
Former German Minister of Research and TechnologySpeaks Out About September 11th and After
A translation of an interview published in the German daily newspaper Der Tagesspiegel on 2002-01-13.
Andreas von Bülow was Minister for Research and Technology in the cabinet of former German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt, and was for 25 years an SPD member of the German parliament. During official investigations he learned of the work of the German and American intelligence and security agencies, and subsequently wrote a book on this subject, Im Namen des Staates (In the Name of the State). Von Bülow, 64, lives in Bonn, where he currently works as a lawyer.
This interview was conducted by Stephan Lebert and Norbert Thomma.
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/vonbuelow.htm
Former German Defense Minister Confirms CIA Involvement in 9/11: Alex Jones Interviews Andreas Von Buelow
More on
www.prisonplanet.com/021104vonbuelow.html
Good Morning/Afternoon/Evening!
It's Thursday!
"WASHINGTON - President Bush's victory in getting the rules he wanted to try suspected terrorists could be diminished."
When it rains, it pours on the Gerbil. All of the Gerbil's pixie dust is now saw dust.. He certainly will be yearning the bottle.
The question is which crimes will nail the Gerbil once and for all: the 750 laws that he has broken, the Abu Ghraib, wiretapping, domestic spying and so on? The chimpster's days in office are numbered. And I know that he is afraid of what Pelosi and Waxman have planned for him...
Unrefuted report by hundreds of experts.
http://www.physics911.net/germanintel.htm
http://www.patriotsquestion911.com
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/november2004/281104unmistakablecharges.htm
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/09/20060915-2.html
"He told us that the operatives had been instructed to ensure that the explosives went off at a high-"
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc1_fire.html
Who murdered Katherine Smith?
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/SakherHammad_WTC_9-11.html
"Pull it" and they pulled it, each building.
There was no one in the building when they said pull it.
Pre-wired explosives, neocon operatives.
I want my costitution back now!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
T:
I hear ya sistah!! The Constitution is more than a piece of paper..and the dead soldiers are more than a number!
We need to restore civility and dignity to this country!!
January is just around the corner.
I can't wait to say Happy New Year...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Geezer:
Yes and I will be saying *CHEERS* more than SPB and GEF combined together! LOL
Have a great day everyone!! :D
Cream of GEF.
Hi Anthony
I was just kidding about EXHIBIT C
Eventually all of this will see the light of day, and dawn is on the horizon, but even at high noon, there will be those that deny it. Just another "Inconvenient Truth" to them.
There are those that will play pocket pool, RE: play with their billiard balls, while they are crawling in the sand and dying of thirst for the truth.
http://mosnas2.blogspot.com/2006/11/911-debateloose-change-vs-popular.html
Thursday's front page of the New York Post depicts the two chairman of the Iraq Study Group as "surrender monkeys," suggesting that the bipartisan independent panel has urged the U.S. to "give up" and admit defeat in the war in Iraq.
At least there is one voice of reason here. IF Bush is the giant liar everyone here thinks he is (including me), then WHY go to the trouble of something really expensive to drum up support for a war when he could have just lied about the WMD a little bit harder? He could have just said that Saddam's got the bomb and wants to use it and spared the all the expense and the loss of human life in the economic sector. People would have believed that and we would have gone to war anyway.
Iraq was poorly planned and a mess. How could this so-called 'inside job' be pulled off and worked when the Iraq planning was such a disaster?
Biloxy
"It's Thursday!"
The Gerbil was pathetic in the interview with Blair this AM. If it was a vaudeville show, they would have gave him the hook. Poppy Bush will indeed be drained of any h2o that is left in his body...heh heh
Why did Mortimer Zuckerman run away when he saw our protest at the Pierre Hotel in NYC?
http://www.actionlyme.org/
Anthony,
the debris clouds resulting from the collapse of the WTC were not pyroclastic.
A pyroclastic cloud, or flow, is a volcanic event in which a mix of superheated gases and rock moves at a speed of 150 km/h and temp of 100-800 C.
There wouldn't be a whole lotta Manhattan left.
Hmmm. Ya think ALDF (or now the Infectious Diseases Society of America) sponsors like AIG (richest insurance company in the world) and Mortimer Zuckerman (real estate empire) would appreciate the handiwork of the Lyme criminals at NYMC in Valhalla, New York? Why would all these people be involved in the Bullshit in Lyme Disease? Why is Mark Klempner's secret haplotype still a secret?
Hi geezerpower!
"All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed;
Second, it is violently opposed;
and
Third, it is accepted as self-evident."
attributed to Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)
I think we are in the second phase, and as the arguments of those who violently oppose it get louder, the more the world will take notice of the debate that has been going on, and the bigger the critical mass of people who want answers will get and the greater the momentum to bring the perpetrators to book.
More on EXHIBIT C in a mo'.
Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld formally charged for murder, racketeering and treason re: 9/11 and genocide re Afghanistan and Iraq
VERIFIED CRIMINAL COMPAINT, ON INFORMATION
U.S.A. v. I. LEWIS LIBBY.
Criminal No. 05-394 (RBW)
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/gwbush/vcc.htm
EXHIBIT C (cont.)
III. Could the Official Account of the Pentagon Possibly Be True?
According to the official account, the Pentagon was struck by AA Flight 77, under the control of al-Qaeda hijacker Hani Hanjour. This account is challenged by many facts.
First, Flight 77 allegedly, after making a U-turn in the mid-west, flew back to Washington undetected for 40 minutes, even though it was then known that hijacked airliners were being used as weapons and even though the US military has the best radar systems in the world, one of which, it brags, “does not miss anything occurring in North American airspace.”
Second, the aircraft, in order to hit the west wing, reportedly executed a 270-degree downward spiral, which according to some experts would have been impossible for a Boeing 757. Hanjour, moreover, was known as “a terrible pilot,” who could not even fly a small airplane.
Third, how could a pilot as poor as Hanjour have found his way back to Washington without guidance from the ground?
Fourth, the Pentagon is surely the best defended building on the planet. It is not only within the P-56-A restricted air space that extends 17 miles in all directions from the Washington Monument, but also within P-56-B, the three-mile ultra-restricted zone above the White House, the Capitol, and the Pentagon. It is only a few miles from Andrews Air Force Base, which, assigned to protect these restricted zones, has at least three squadrons with fighter jets on alert at all times. (The claim by The 9/11 Commission Report that no fighters were on alert the morning of 9/11 is wholly implausible.) Also, the Pentagon is surely protected by batteries of surface-to-air missiles, which are programmed to destroy any aircraft without a US military transponder entering the Pentagon’s airspace. (So even if Flight 77 had entered the Pentagon’s airspace, it could have escaped being shot down only if officials in the Pentagon had deactivated its anti-aircraft defenses.)
Fifth, terrorists brilliant enough to get through the US military’s defense system would not have struck the west wing, for many reasons: It had been reinforced, so the damage was less severe than a strike anywhere else would have been; it was still being renovated, so relatively few people were there; the secretary of defense and all the top brass, whom terrorists would presumably have wanted to kill, were in the east wing; and hitting the west wing required a difficult maneuver, whereas crashing into the roof would have been easier and deadlier.
Sixth, there is considerable evidence that the aircraft that struck the Pentagon was not even a Boeing 757. For one thing, unlike the strikes on the Twin Towers, the strike on the Pentagon did not create a detectable seismic signal. Also, the kind of damage and debris that would have been produced by the impact of a Boeing 757 was not produced by the strike on the Pentagon, according to both photographs and eyewitnesses. Karen Kwiatkowski, who was then an Air Force Lieutenant Colonel employed at the Pentagon, writes of “a strange lack of visible debris on the Pentagon lawn, where I stood only moments after the impact. . . . I saw . . . no airplane metal or cargo debris.” Photographs show that the façade of the west wing remained standing for 30 minutes after the strike and that, during this time, the hole in this façade was only about 16 to 18 feet in diameter. A Boeing 757 has a wingspan of about 125 feet, and a steel engine is mounted on each wing. And yet there was, as Former Air Force Colonel George Nelson has pointed out, no visible damage on either side of this hole. Former pilot Ralph Omholt, discussing both debris and damage on the basis of the photographic evidence, writes: “there is no doubt that a plane did not hit the Pentagon. There is no hole big enough to swallow a 757. . . . There is no viable evidence of burning jet fuel. . . . The pre-collapse Pentagon section showed no ‘forward-moving’ damage. . . . There was no tail, no wings; no damage consistent with a B-757 ‘crash.’”
Additional evidence that no large airliner hit the west wing is provided by the fact that the fourth-floor office of Isabelle Slifer, which was directly above the strike zone (between the first and second floors), was not damaged by the initial impact.
There is considerable evidence, moreover, that the aircraft that struck the Pentagon was instead a US military missile. This evidence consists partly of testimony. Lon Rains, editor of Space News, said: “I was convinced it was a missile. It came in so fast it sounded nothing like an airplane.” The upper management official at LAX, quoted earlier as saying that he overheard members of LAX Security receiving word of a stand-down order, says that they later received word that “the Pentagon had been hit by a rocket.” Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, in an apparent slip of the tongue, referred in an interview to “the missile [used] to damage this building.”
The missile hypothesis is also supported by physical evidence. Dr. Janette Sherman of Alexandria reports that shortly after the strike her Geiger counter showed the radiation level, about 12 miles downwind from the Pentagon, to be 8-10 times higher than normal. Two days later, Bill Bellinger, the EPA radiation expert for the region, said that the rubble at the crash site was radioactive, adding that he believed the source to be depleted uranium. These findings are what one would expect, says Dr. Leuren Moret -- formerly a scientist at the Livermore Nuclear Weapons Laboratory -- if the Pentagon had been struck by a military missile with a depleted uranium warhead.
On the basis of all this evidence, retired Army Major Doug Rokke has said: “When you look at the whole thing, especially the crash site void of airplane parts [and] the size of the hole left in the building . . . , it looks like the work of a missile.”
A seventh reason to be dubious about the official story is that evidence was destroyed. Shortly after the strike, government agents picked up debris from the Pentagon in front of the impact site, put it in a large container, and carried it off. Shortly thereafter the entire lawn was covered with dirt and gravel, with the result that any remaining forensic evidence was covered up. FBI agents also immediately confiscated the videos from security cameras on two nearby buildings. Although the Department of Justice, responding to a request under the Freedom of Information Act, has acknowledged the FBI’s possession of at least one of these videos, the DoJ has refused to release it.
These seven problems, besides challenging the official account, collectively indicate that the strike on the Pentagon was orchestrated by forces within our own government -- an act that would clearly constitute treason.
Jeweler Was Told To Lie In Princess Diana Case
Maira Oliveira
All Headline News
Thursday, December 7, 2006
A key witness in the inquiry into the death of Britain's Princess Diana recently claimed police threatened him to change his evidence.
Jeweler Alberto Repossi - who claims he sold Diana's lover Dodi Al Fayed an engagement ring the day before the couple were killed in a car crash in Paris on August 31, 1997 - alleges he was put under pressure by investigators to retract the statement he gave to Lord Stevens, who is leading the inquiry.
There is speculation that investigators did not want evidence that Diana and Dodi were to become engaged to be made public, as it would fuel conspiracy theories championed by Dodi's father Mohammed Al Fayed that the princess was murdered as part of a secret plot to prevent her from marrying a Muslim.
http://infowars.net/articles/december2006/071206Jeweler.htm
Isn't it time to suture the wounds?
http://www.light-to-dark.com/cut_n_run.html
Time to restore our protections whether the republicans like it or not.
EXHIBIT C (cont.)
IV. Why Did the President and His Secret Service Agents Remain at the School?
President George W. Bush reportedly believed, upon hearing that a plane had struck one of the Twin Towers, that it was an accident. It was not terribly strange, therefore, that he decided to go ahead with the photo-op at the school in Sarasota. Word of the second strike, however, should have indicated to him and his Secret Service agents -- assuming the truth of official story, according to which these strikes were unexpected -- that the country was undergoing an unprecedented terrorist attack. And yet the Secret Service allowed him to remain at the school for another half hour.
This behavior was very strange. The president’s location had been highly publicized. If the attacks were indeed unexpected, the Secret Service would have had no idea how many planes had been hijacked, and they would have had to assume that the president himself might be one of the targets: What could be more satisfying to foreign terrorists attacking high-value targets in the United States than to kill the president? For all the Secret Service would have known, a hijacked airliner might have been bearing down on the school at that very minute, ready to crash into it, killing the president and everyone else there -- including the Secret Service agents themselves. It is, in any case, standard procedure for the Secret Service to rush the president to a safe location whenever there is any sign that he may be in danger. And yet these agents, besides allowing the president to remain in the classroom another 10 minutes, permitted him to speak on television, thereby announcing to the world that he was still at the school.
Would not this behavior be explainable only if Bush and the head of the Secret Service detail knew that the planned attacks did not include an attack on the president? And how could this have been known for certain unless the attacks were being carried out by people within our own government? The 9/11 Commission, far from asking these questions, was content to report that “[t]he Secret Service told us they . . . did not think it imperative for [the president] to run out the door.” A serious inquiry into this matter, therefore, remains to be made.
SQ
We'll be celebrating and the Gerbil will be running to Paraguay
"The Gerbil was pathetic in the interview with Blair this AM. If it was a vaudeville show, they would have gave him the hook."
Geezerpower:
What do you expect from tweedley dee and tweedley dumb? All the Gerbil can speak is his own language: gerbilspeak. He has no answers for the UK, U.S. and the the UN to how to solve the problems in Iraq. When you have an incompetent idiot that can't find Iraq on the map and was a draft dodger with no miltary experience to lead the fight of terrorism, that is why Iraq is in more bad shape.. His days are numbered in office.. The American people will want the Gerbil removed from office in 2007. And Blair? The poodle is finished.
Thanks for that, fussbudget.
The idea of the pyroclastic clouds comes from the following article:
Quote: When I first saw scenes of the towers collapsing, with clouds of smoke billowing through the streets of lower Manhattan, I knew that I had seen it before. But, I couldn't say where. Now, I know.
The US Geological Survey website provides us with a definition of a pyroclastic flow as a ground hugging avalanche of hot gas and debris. The rising gas chimney is clearly visible in this photo of the North Tower implosion, with pyroclastic flows between buildings. The cauliflower shape of the debris cloud is a telltale sign of pyroclastic flows generated by massive explosions, typical of volcanic eruptions and controlled demolitions.
A pyroclastic surge can even flow over water as hot gases carry dust created by explosive energy. Here, the South Tower implosion creates a pyroclastic surge, moving out over the Hudson river.
Once again, our definition of a pyroclastic flow: hot gases carrying dust and debris flow along the ground with a fluid motion. It requires explosive energy to generate the necessary heat, dust, and debris. Turbulence and fluidization of debris are characteristic.
Seeing this footage of pyroclastic flows from volcanic eruptions juxtaposed alongside those that erupted from the collapsing towers will make your jaw drop - it did mine. This is - literally - 9/11's smoking gun. End quote.
While the use of the term pyroclastic may, as you say, be incoorect, the point remains that the kind of cloud we saw following the collapse of thr Twin Towers is more reminiscent of that which follows a controlled demolition due to hig explosives than it is to the collapse of a building due to gravity alone.
http://wakeupfromyourslumber.blogspot.com/2006/09/pyroclastic-flows-911s-smoking-gun_13.html
biloxi said:
And Blair? The poodle is finished.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Blair allegedly promised to have over power to Gordon Brown, now Chancellor of the Exchequer, sometime during his premiership in return for Brown's support when he stood as leader of the Labour Party after John Smith's untimely death due to a heart attack.
That he hasn't as yet done so has become the source of bad blood between the two former friends and allies.
Blair said in his speech to the labour party last summer that it would be his last speech, i.e. that he would stand down withion the year.
My reading is that the little bitch is hanging on to office for dear life because he knows that once he leaves he will lose de facto immunity enjoyed by heads of state.
Bush is not heading the family consigliere's advice to leave iraq.
He still thinks denial is the name of a river in Egypt.
There are too many skeletons in blair's closet.
These possibly include:
death of princess diana
lying about WMDs
Dr David Kelly
the current mess in iraq
misleading parliament about his presence at a bilderberg meeting
donations to labour party
"History will forgive us...@ he said to cheers from Congress.
Like heck it will. It will revile you, tony blair, as it will your buddy in crime george bush.
Amen SBP!Everything you said about Bush is right on. I am over this Curious George plays president thing.Where the heck is the man in the Hat? Come and get your monkey already.
"My reading is that the little bitch is hanging on to office for dear life because he knows that once he leaves he will lose de facto immunity enjoyed by heads of state."
Anthony:
Interesting about Blair.. Once there is a new investigation in 9/11 and the connection to Iraq, best believe Blair will be expose with his connection with the Gerbil. So as you said, Blair has to stay in office the same as King Gerbil has to stay in the WH. The chimpster made too many deals and he certainly want that to go up to flames. Congressman Henry Waxman is surely on a tear to investigated the the Gerbil and company. I just can't wait what investigation that he will strat off first..
EXHIBIT C (cont.)
V. Why Did the 9/11 Commission Lie about Vice President Cheney?
One sign of the complicity of Vice President Cheney is the fact that the 9/11 Commission evidently felt a need to lie about the time of two of his activities: his entry into the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC) under the White House and his giving the order to shoot down any unauthorized airplanes.
It had been widely reported that Cheney had gone down to the PEOC shortly after the second strike on the WTC, hence about 9:15. The most compelling witness was Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta, who testified to the 9/11 Commission that when he arrived at the PEOC at 9:20, Cheney was already there and fully in charge. The 9/11 Commission Report, however, claimed that Cheney did not enter the PEOC until “shortly before 10:00, perhaps at 9:58.” Mineta’s testimony, given in an open hearing, was simply omitted from the Commission’s final report. Why would the Commission go to such lengths to conceal the true time of Cheney’s entry into the PEOC?
One possible reason would involve the content of Mineta’s testimony. He said:
During the time that the airplane was coming in to the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President, “The plane is 50 miles out.” “The plane is 30 miles out.” And when it got down to “the plane is 10 miles out,” the young man also said to the Vice President, “Do the orders still stand?” And the Vice President . . . said, “Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?”
Mineta said that this conversation -- evidently meaning the final exchange -- occurred at about 9:25 or 9:26.
This testimony creates a problem for the official story. Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld’s spokesman, in explaining why the Pentagon was not evacuated before it was struck, claimed that “[t]he Pentagon was simply not aware that this aircraft was coming our way.” The 9/11 Commission claimed that there was no warning about an unidentified aircraft heading towards Washington until 9:36 and hence only “one or two minutes” before the Pentagon was struck at 9:38. Mineta’s account, however, says that Cheney knew about an approaching aircraft more than 10 minutes earlier. There would have been over 12 minutes for the Pentagon to be evacuated.
Mineta’s account also seems to suggest that Cheney had issued stand-down orders. Mineta himself did not make this allegation, saying instead that he assumed that “the orders” were to have the plane shot down. But besides the fact that that interpretation does not fit what actually happened--the aircraft was not shot down -- it would make the story unintelligible: The question whether the orders still stood would not make sense unless they were orders to do something unexpected -- not to shoot the aircraft down. By omitting Mineta’s testimony and stating that Cheney did not enter the PEOC until almost 10:00, the 9/11 Commission implied that Cheney could not have given a stand-down order to allow an aircraft to strike the Pentagon.
The lie about Cheney’s entry into the PEOC was also important to the controversy over whether the US military shot down Flight 93. The 9/11 Commission, simply ignoring a vast amount of evidence that the military did so, supported the official claim that it did not. The Commission provided this support by claiming that Cheney, having not arrived at the PEOC until almost 10:00, did not issue the shoot-down order until after 10:10 -- which would have been seven or more minutes after Flight 93 had crashed (at 10:03). But in addition to the evidence that Cheney had been in the PEOC since about 9:15, we also have evidence -- including statements from Richard Clarke and Colonel Robert Marr, the head of NORAD’s northeast sector (NEADS) -- that Cheney’s shoot-down order was issued well before 10:00.
The 9/11 Commission’s obvious lies about Cheney’s activities give reason to suspect that it, under the leadership of Philip Zelikow, was trying to conceal Cheney’s responsibility for the Pentagon strike and the downing of Flight 93.
VI. Did Members of the Bush-Cheney Administration Have Reasons to Desire the Attacks of 9/11?
Besides having the means and opportunity to orchestrate the events of 9/11 and their subsequent cover-up, high officials in the Bush-Cheney administration would also have had motives.
Afghanistan: Zbigniew Brzezinski’s 1997 book, The Grand Chessboard, had said that establishing military bases in Central Asia would be crucial for maintaining “American primacy,” partly because of the huge oil reserves around the Caspian Sea. But American democracy, he added, “is inimical to imperial mobilization.” Brzezinski, explaining that the public had “supported America’s engagement in World War II largely because of the shock effect of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor,” suggested that Americans today would support the needed military operations in Central Asia only “in the circumstance of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat.”
Support for these operations was generated by 9/11 plus the claim by the Bush-Cheney administration that the attacks had been planned in Afghanistan by Osama bin Laden—-a claim for which it refused to provide any proof.
A more specific motivation was provided by the “pipeline war.” The Bush-Cheney administration supported--as had the Clinton-Gore administration until 1999--UNOCAL’s plan to build an oil-and-gas pipeline through Afghanistan, but the Taliban, being unable to provide sufficient security, had become regarded as an obstacle. In a meeting in Berlin in July 2001, representatives of the Bush-Cheney administration, trying to get the Taliban to share power with other factions, reportedly gave them an ultimatum: “Either you accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs.” When the Taliban refused, the Americans reportedly said that “military action against Afghanistan would go ahead . . . before the snows started falling in Afghanistan, by the middle of October at the latest.”
Given the fact that the attacks on New York and Washington occurred on September 11, the U.S. military had time to get logistically ready to begin the attack on Afghanistan on October 7.
Iraq: Some key members of the Bush-Cheney administration -- including Paul Wolfowitz, Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Donald Rumsfeld, and Dick Cheney himself -- had in the late 1990s been active members of an organization, the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), that advocated attacking Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein, establish a strong military presence, and control the oil. PNAC’s Rebuilding America’s Defenses, released late in 2000, reiterated the idea of a permanent military presence in the Gulf region, saying that the “unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification” but “the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.”
Immediately upon taking office, the Bush administration -- two former members have revealed -- was intent on attacking Iraq. Then in 2003, after its war in Afghanistan, the administration used 9/11 as a pretext for attacking Iraq, partly by suggesting that Saddam was involved in the attacks, partly by playing on the American people’s sense, created by 9/11, of being vulnerable to a major attack from abroad.
Increased Military Spending: A second possible motive was provided by PNAC’s more general goal of further increasing America’s military superiority to be able to achieve global domination. This goal had already been asserted in the draft of the “Defense Planning Guidance” written in 1992 by Wolfowitz and Libby under the guidance of Cheney, who was completing his tenure as secretary of defense. (In an essay that was entered into the Congressional Record, this draft was portrayed as an early version of Cheney’s “Plan . . . to rule the world.”)
In 2000, Wolfowitz and Libby were listed as participants in the project to produce PNAC’s Rebuilding America’s Defenses, in which this goal showed up again. This document also contained an idea perhaps derived from Brzezinski’s book: After saying that the desired Pax Americana “must have a secure foundation on unquestioned U.S. military preeminence” and that such preeminence will require a technological transformation of the US military, it adds that this process of transformation will “likely be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event--like a new Pearl Harbor."
When 9/11 came, it was immediately treated as “the Pearl Harbor of the 21st century,” as President Bush reportedly called it that very night. It was also characterized as, in Bush’s words, “a great opportunity,” with Rumsfeld adding that 9/11 created “the kind of opportunities that World War II offered, to refashion the world.” This idea then showed up in The National Security Strategy of the United States of America, issued by the Bush administration in September 2002, which brazenly said: “The events of September 11, 2001 opened vast, new opportunities.”
A central dimension of the desired technological transformation of the military is the weaponization of space, euphemistically called “Missile Defense.” In January of 2001, the Commission to Assess U.S. National Security Space Management and Organization, which was chaired by Rumsfeld, published its report. Speaking of the need for massive funding for the U.S. Space Command, the Rumsfeld Commission asked whether such funding would occur only after a “Space Pearl Harbor.”
On the evening of 9/11, Rumsfeld held a press conference. In attendance was Senator Carl Levin, the chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee, who was asked this question: “Senator Levin, you and other Democrats in Congress have voiced fear that you simply don’t have enough money for the large increase in defense that the Pentagon is seeking, especially for missile defense. . . . Does this sort of thing convince you that an emergency exists in this country to increase defense spending. . . ? Congress immediately appropriated an additional $40 billion for the Pentagon and much more later, with few questions asked.
Biloxy
"The American people will want the Gerbil removed from office in 2007. And Blair? The poodle is finished."
Nostradamus was right...The village idiot will rule...The Gerbil and Blare deserve a new years present.
"I am over this Curious George plays president thing"
Calamityjane:
A lot of people incuding yourself are sick of the chimpster. You can see that in the poll numbers and people's attitudes today.. He has nearly destroyed this country finanically, morally, and emotionally.. The more casualities in Iraq and Afganistan and the more the Gerbil remains undecisive and stay the course, the more determined people will want the chimpster remove from office. And it will not be Congress to do it. It will be the people that will demand the Gerbil to be removed. Look what happen to the Nixon Administration and Watergate. The people wanted Nixon impeached from office. It is history repeating itself again. Same players, same Nixon playbook, but different era and different situation.
"He still thinks denial is the name of a river in Egypt."
*lol*
Anthony:
Remember the chimpster still thinks global warming is warming the globe..
Wish we had a new thread. Some posts are too long, etc.
"He still thinks denial is the name of a river in Egypt."
*lol*
Anthony:
Remember the chimpster still thinks global warming is warming the globe..
BWARHAHAHAHhaa...
"Wish we had a new thread. Some posts are too long, etc."
Give a yell out to the Administator of this blog.. BTW.. where the man with the globe?
New thread please!
EXHIBIT C (cont.)
VII. Summation: The 9/11 Attacks as Acts of Treason
The facts recited above constitute prima facie evidence that the named individuals -- U.S. President George W. Bush, U.S. Vice President Richard B. Cheney, U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld -- and other John and Jane Does are independently and jointly guilty of Treason against these United States under Article III(3) of the U.S. Constitution, because:
I. The attacks of 9/11, as portrayed in the official account, could not have succeeded if standard operating procedures between the FAA and NORAD had been followed. The Pentagon, under the leadership of Donald Rumsfeld, has provided three mutually inconsistent accounts of NORAD’s response, which means that at least two of them are false. Moreover, the third account, articulated by the 9/11 Commission, is contradicted by a wide range of facts, including evidence that the FAA had notified NORAD in a timely fashion. There must have been stand-down orders, and these could have come only from the highest levels of the Pentagon and the White House.
II. Overwhelming evidence exists that the collapses of the Twin Towers and Building 7 were instances of controlled demolition. But al-Qaeda operatives could not have obtained the needed access to the buildings to plant the explosives and would not have ensured that the buildings come straight down. The controlled demolition, therefore, had to be the work of insiders. That President Bush was one of those insiders is suggested by the fact that his brother and cousin were principals in the company in charge of WTC security. Complicity at the highest levels of the federal government is also indicated by the removal of evidence (the collapsed steel), which is normally a federal offense. Finally, if the airplane strikes could have occurred only with the consent of the president and the secretary of defense (as suggested in the previous point), the coordination of these strikes with the demolition of the buildings implies their involvement in the latter as well.
III. Overwhelming evidence also exists for the conclusion that the attack on the Pentagon was an inside job. That the official story could not be true is evident from many facts: Hani Hanjour’s incompetence; the choice of the west wing as the target; the impossibility of a commercial airliner’s coming back to Washington undetected and hitting the Pentagon unless permitted; and the lack of physical evidence consistent with an attack by a Boeing 757. That the strike was an inside job is implied by the falsity of the official story, the evidence that the strike was made by a military aircraft, the removal of evidence, and the government’s refusal to release videos of the strike. This operation could hardly have been planned without the involvement of Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld.
IV. Complicity at the highest levels of the federal government is also indicated by President Bush’s remaining at the school after it was evident -- given the truth of the official account -- that the United States was experiencing a surprise attack. This behavior makes sense only if Bush and his lead Secret Service agent knew that there would be no attack on the school.
V. The complicity of Vice President Cheney in the attack on the Pentagon and the downing of Flight 93 is implied by the testimony of Secretary Mineta in conjunction with the false claims of the 9/11 Commission, under the guidance of administration insider Philip Zelikow, as to when Cheney went to the PEOC and when he issued the shoot-down authorization.
VI. The conclusion from the evidence that members of the Bush administration orchestrated the attacks of 9/11 is reinforced by the fact that they had some huge projects -- prosecuting wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and obtaining funding to accelerate the technological transformation of the military -- that would likely be possible only in the event of “a new Pearl Harbor.”
On the basis of this and other evidence, the conclusion that the Bush-Cheney administration was complicit in the 9/11 attacks has been reached by many Americans, including intellectuals and former military officers. It is time for an independent official investigation into this evidence.
The dots never were connected on the weapons of mass destruction thing after David kelley lost his life, and BBC got it's tit caught in the ringer. There was a lot going on at that time in both the US and England. The reporter that talked to Kelley was fired and the head of BBC resigned. BBC is no longer the unbiased news source that it used to be.
Cooper's First Piece On 60 Min. Sunday
CNN anchor Anderson Cooper "will report his first story for 60 Minutes" this Sunday, CBS announced today.
Cooper's report features Joe Darby, "the man who touched off one of the biggest news stories of the war in Iraq when he gave authorities pictures of U.S. soldiers abusing Iraqi prisoners at the Abu Ghraib prison." Cooper already covered Darby on his CNN program -- Randi Kaye's piece aired on 360 in August.
I like Anderson Cooper's reporting. I am looking forward to see his piece on 60 minutes this Sunday. A very good move and choice by 60 minutes. Cooper has talent. I am sure the late Ed Bradley would be proud.
Time to restore our protections whether the republicans like it or not.
============================
Stephen:
Yes, I agree, it's long overdue!!
I just love your art! :)
BTW.. where the man with the globe?
================================
SPB:
He's getting his globe warmed!!
LOL
Good Afternoon JBs and Fitzie!
Have you seen Feingold's comments on the Iraq Study Group Report which he believes "completely misses the point?"
Here it is on YouTube
At least Russ has a mind of his own and more cajones than all of Congress put together...
Oooooh maaaan, it's colder than a naked @ss in Siberia today...I don't know how you New Yorkers and Chicagoans do it!!! Bbbrrrrr I just can't get warm.
a tinfoil hat said...
Wish we had a new thread. Some posts are too long, etc.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yes, I know.I'm the principal offender in this regard.
I will post one more post from EXHIBIT C, then I'll simply post the links and a brief introduction to the remaining EXHIBITs over the next few days.
I think I've made my point and further posts of this kind will only aggravate people who might otherwise be won over.
The short, pithy comment is usually the most effective.
Anthony
Short post
I remember hundreds of thousands of people protesting in London... March 2003.
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a338/linus3/_38825847_march1300.jpg
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a338/linus3/london2003.jpg
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
BBC is no longer the unbiased news source that it used to be.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I suspect that there are factions within the BBC, which some years ago was described as the true opposition to the government, just as there was, and is, say, in the CIA which is composed of true patriots working for their country's security and the inner sanctum of bush cronies, working for the interests of power elite.
Did you read my post on Jeremy Paxman's report on a German Human Rights Lawyer's attempts to indict Rumsfeld on BBC's Newsnight? It was put on the YouTube. That would never be shown on Fox News.
"He's getting his globe warmed!!"
The crunch 'n prosecutor is taking the advice from the global warming-in-chief! Hee hee...
Isn't that what the bubblehead Britney Spears said in the documentary of Fahrenheit 9/11 as she was popping and chewing gum:"We have to do what the President says." LOL!
Fitz needs to stop warming his globe and put up another new posting...
GEEZERPOWER said...
Anthony
Short post
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's the spirit, GEEZERPOWER!
I wonder where GEF is.. Is he playing with himself again or has he fell asleep from watching JAG for the 10th time?
*lol*
here
AND
here
"He's getting his globe warmed!! "
I won't touch that one with a ten-foot pole, S-Q...
Geezer, I see you have your trucking shoes on again!
"Countries that participate in talks must not fund terrorism, must help the young democracy survive, must help with the economics of the country," Bush said. "If people are not committed, if Syria and Iran is not committed to that concept, then they shouldn't bother to show up."
The chimpster's diplomacy = agree with us, then we will talk about what I want to talk about. Nothing will ever change from sasquatch 43.
Breaking News from ABCNEWS.com:
BRITISH PRIME MINISTER TONY BLAIR TELLS ABC NEWS TIME IS RUNNING SHORT IN IRAQ, AND THAT HE IS AGAINST SENDING IN MORE TROOPS
Is it true that a "Bush family member" was in charge of security for the WTC? And is it true that the building was evacuated for a period of days, for some sort of "rewiring" before 911? And is it true that investment and financial paperwork (more safely destroyed by shredding than detonation) was resident in the WTC that would have been incriminating for certain "powerful" families?
Heard it on late-night talk, hope it was just a dream. (TRUTH matters.)
"Geezer, I see you have your trucking shoes on again! "
Yes that was in my younger days. It's hard work being zorch...
Here's me before I dropped out & tuned in...LOL
GEF is getting his globe warmed...
ZZZzzz...*bBWAHAHAHA
GEEZERPOWER said...
Anthony
Short post
I remember hundreds of thousands of people protesting in London... March 2003.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I wasn't one of them, GEEZERPOWER
Contrary to the contention made by some on this blogsite that 9/11 conspiracy theorists are motivated by politics, e.g. hatred of Bush, I was kind of right of centre and politically complacent at the time those demonstrations took place, but sufficiently switched on to suspect that with Iraq, we weren’t being told the whole story.
Back in 1997, I accepted that Diana had died in a car crash, because the driver was drunk and it was being chased by the paparazzi.
When Mohamed al Fayed started to say that his son and Diana had been murdered, I dismissed it as an aggrieved father looking for someone to blame.
On 9/11 I bought the official story and swallowed every word of it.
I regarded it as the ultimate obscenity for which Osama bin Laden and the Arab sickos who'd hi-jacked the planes were solely responsible.
I revelled in the footage of alleged terrorists who'd been rounded up in Afghanistan being humiliated in Guantanomo Bay, and thought that giving them pages of the Ku'ran to wipe their arses with instead of toilet paper would be appropriate.
When the BBC produced a documentary on reactions to 9/11 in Saudi Arabia in which they reported Arab talk of Mossad being responsible, I dismissed it as a bunch of dumb towel-heads in denial.
When Dr David Kelly died, I accepted the official version.
Because of the documentary which came out in the November of 2003 called "Beyond Conspiracy", I believed that Lee Harvey Oswald had acted alone in killing JFK, and, having read a digest of Leo Damore's "Senatorial Privilege" in 2004 9in reality a website produced by the GOP in election year), I believed that Edward Kennedy had been in the car in which Mary Joe had died of slow asphyxiation and had not reported the accident to the police in order to give his body time to metabolise the alcohol in his bloodstream to avoid being done for DUI.
Then I started to write a novel based on the murder/disappearance/
suicide of John Arthur Paisley in 1978. JAP was a CIA operative whose job was to analyse data from the Soviet Union. It was suggested at the time of his death thatb he was a mole and that he had committed suicide or staged his death and disappeared because he was about to be exposed as a mole.
In order to carry out research, I visited America, and was in Noo Yoik while the Democrat National Congress was taking place in Boston. I watched it every night in a YMCA off Central Park and was disturbed by some of the things I heard.
I found America very polarised, with democrat supporters coming up to me in the street and asking me if I would help them “get rid of George Bush”.
“we love your Tony Blair,” said some gentlemen in a bar when I stopped to ask for information on how to get to Noo Yoik while driving down highway 95 from New Haven Connecticut. Some of them thought that Blair was the leader of the Conservative Party.
I had other priorities at the time.
On my return to England, I began to reinvestigate the John Arthur Paisley case again, and found that Victor Marchetti had suggested that Paisley had been killed because he would have been in a position to know whether or not Oswald was working for American intelligence or not and was about to go to the H of R Investigation of the assassination of JFK and MLK with what he knew.
This forced me to revisit successively JFK, RFK, Chappaquiddick, Princess Diana, JFK junior, and 9/11, with the result that, over the course of two years, my views on these events radically changed, so that when 7/7 took place, I knew something very fishy was going on.
Had I taken a closer look at the waters between Edgartown and Chappaquiddick when I took the boat to Martha’s vineyard as I approached the harbour of Edgartown, I would have realised that Edward Kennedy could not possibly have swum that channel on the night Mary Joe died.
Demonstrations weren't, still aren't my scene GEEZERPOWER. But I think that today I would be far more sympathetic to those people who demonstrated in 2003 and again during the labour party conference in manchester last september.
A_Loon said...
Is it true that
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I believe that Marvin Blair was a principal of the security company responsible for security atthe twin towers.
The incriminating papers would have been in WTC7 from which, according to Andreas von Bulow, a former minister in the Schmidt govenment, the attacks were directed.
I believe that Marvin Blair was a principal of the security company responsible for security atthe twin towers.
=============================
Hi Anthony:
Didn't you mean Marvin Bush?
Last post for tonight
My Observation of LAX Security Events on 9/11 By an Upper Management LAX Official
I was employed in upper management at LAX involved with security in the APO (Air Port Operations -- where the planes are, not the passengers). I will not otherwise identify myself in this statement, since I, for both personal and professional reasons, need to remain anonymous. But I will give as much detail as possible about security-related events in the APO that I overheard on September 11, 2001, and will also suggest ways in which my account could be corroborated.
“Security” in the APO involves the CHP, LAWA PD, LAPD, and the FBI, herein referred to as “Security” (but the CHP was not in proximity to me during the period my account covers).
My Account
As on other days, there was “chatter” on LAX Security walkie-talkies, so what Security was saying could easily be heard. On some of the walkie-talkies I could overhear both sides of the conversations, on others only one. I do not know who was at the other end of the walkie-talkies, but I can only assume that it was LAX dispatch or command.
While there, I observed and heard the following:
At first, LAX Security was very upset because at that time it seemed to Security that none of the Air Traffic Controllers (ATCs) tracking the hijacked airliners had notified NORAD as required. Security was well aware that LAX was a target and Emergency SOP were already in progress in that there was discussion of evacuating the airport.
More chatter revealed that the ATCs had notified NORAD, but that NORAD had not responded because it had been “ordered to stand down.” This report made Security even more upset, so they tried to find out who had issued that order. A short time later the word came down that the order had come “from the highest level of the White House.” This seemed inappropriate, so Security made attempts for more details and clarification, which was not resolved in my presence.
3 planes were grounded and swapped out in Atlanta, Georgia, simply because they did not pass the routine pre-flight inspection checklist. Those planes were found to be fully loaded with automatic weapons. LAX Security surmised that could only have been accomplished by Maintenance, the Caterers, but, in their view, most likely by “House Keeping.”
LAX Security believed that the terrorists did not board the planes through the passenger terminals, but rather by similar means, i.e. via House Keeping. Other airports were mentioned, but I was unable to get it all down. Therefore, I don’t have an accurate accounting for the status and location of the other planes.
Another piece of information that I overheard was that the Pentagon had been hit by a rocket.
There was also a radio station identifying itself as LAX Radio, from which the following was heard:
There were 11 planes and 11 targets. But at the time only 10 of the targets were mentioned: the WTC; the Pentagon; the White House; the Capitol; Camp David; the Sears Tower; the Space Needle; the Trans America Bldg.; LAX; and Air Force One--“if it could be found.”
Two fighter jets had been scrambled and had successfully shot down a hijacked airliner over Pennsylvania. The point of deployment of the fighter jets was also mentioned, but I can’t remember the name of the military base.
Points of origin mentioned included Newark, Atlanta, and other locations, but it was confusing to me in that I couldn’t determine if they were with respect to hijacked planes or fighter jets being scrambled. Unfortunately the names of these airports were not all familiar to me or it would have been easier for me to account for them.
As I was leaving there was an order to evacuate the airport.
In 2001 and 2002 I tried to notify the media of the events at LAX, but they made it clear they were not interested.
President Bush said that he "understands how tough it is" in Iraq, but declined to go so far as to agree that it was "grave and deteriorating."
Yup, coming from the chimpster, the town drunk in his National Guard days and a brain size of a falafel..
S-Q said...
I believe that Marvin Blair was a principal of the security company responsible for security atthe twin towers.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Of course! I think it really is time for bed.
Anthony reminds me of Roger Rancourt with those L O N G Posts.
Are Anthony and Roger the same person?
"Are Anthony and Roger the same person?"
Maybe they are long lost brothers separated by birth. Funny how this blog bring family connections together..
*lol*
Anthony
This would be me in Portland Oregon at a demonstration in march 2003.
You'll have to guess which one...
SQ
Are you having profound revelations again? roflol
try again...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
S-Q said...
I believe that Marvin Blair was a principal of the security company responsible for security atthe twin towers.
=============================
Hi Anthony:
Didn't you mean Marvin Bush?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I do indeed
Are seeing double at 4:48 and anonymnous at 4:53 the same person
Maybe they are long lost brothers separated by birth. Funny how this blog bring family connections together..
Maybe they are long lost brothers separated by birth. Funny how this blog bring family connections together..
Are seeing double at 4:48 and anonymnous at 4:53 and anonymous at 5.03 the same person
Maybe they are long lost brothers separated by birth. Funny how this blog bring family connections together..
5:02 PM
Lyndon LaRouche is global, baby!
All in the family.
Meds will be handed out shortly...
please line up according to urgency!
lol
Are you having profound revelations again? roflol
===========================
Geezer:
Only after 5:00PM...come back later!
ROFLMAO
seeing triple said...
Are seeing double at 4:48 and anonymnous at 4:53 and anonymous at 5.03 the same person
-------------------------
Do you mean like this?
And, that's 5:00PM CST
LOL
Hey donut bloggers...new thread!
Afraid to go to new thread. I will miss my meds.
Happy Day!
ZZZZZzzzzzzz
Lindsay Graham is my Senator.
:-(
(regarding Habeus Corpus)
Post a Comment
<< Home