»The 9/11 Matrix has you...«

GhostTrax wrote:

Yeah haha! The passport supposedly flew through the fireball and landed unharmed while the black boxes where destroyed!

Ha! A cop tried to get me with that trick once. I'd been in a car wreck when I was sixteen with a few buddies of mine. The wreck was my fault (no one was harmed), but the cops really really wanted to prove that I was drunk when it happened (which I wasn't, I had not had a single sip of alcohol and neither had any of my friends).

So they took us aside individually to kinda "interrogate" us (nothing elaborate, just pulled us into seperate cruisers and gave us the old, "Now, son...") And the cop told me he knew we'd been drinking 'cause they'd found a beer near the crash site and it was still cold. This was in October! If there really were a beer, of course the darn thing would be cold, it was like 49 degrees out or something! Obviously there was no beer, he just wanted to get me to "confess" (since I hadn't done anything, I had nothing to confess to though).

SSDD, huh?

The latest letter from ImpeachBush.org--

Dear Capt.,

Once again President Bush has deceived the American people to open the way for a war of aggression, this time against Lebanon. Had it been successful, regime change in Syria and Iran were next on his agenda. It is now clear that the assault on Lebanon was agreed on and planned by the U.S. and Israel long before Hezbollah, reacting to Israel’s brutal assault against Palestine, captured two Israeli soldiers on July 12 of this year which was claimed to justify bombing all of Lebanon. After his tragically criminal war in Iraq and the emerging failure of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan, President Bush apparently believes he can fool most of the people all of the time.

While Europe and the Arab world overwhelmingly called for an immediate cease fire, President Bush and his administration declared Israel "has the right to defend itself," supported the invasion and rejected a cease fire. The world watched in anguish as Israeli aircraft destroyed villages, towns and civilian facilities throughout Lebanon. Hezbollah fighters stopped a massive Israeli invasion of southern Lebanon and rained thousands of missiles into northern Israel. Every belligerent utterance of George W. Bush, our “War President,” and his war seeking assistants, referenced Hezbollah, Syria and Iran in the same breath. All received their special insults, as did the Muslim world, called “Islamic Fascists” by the President of the United States.

After it became clear that Israel had failed to achieve any of its proclaimed military objectives and U.S. officials had acknowledged that Israel was losing the war, the U.S. reversed its position and contributed to a negotiated cease fire to protect Israel. President Bush praised Israel as the Victor and claimed credit for the cease fire. The Lebanese people, Hezbollah, Syria, Iran and the world that watched the month of mayhem knew better. Israel did not even obtain the release of its two captured soldiers. Israel is withdrawing from Lebanon. People are returning to their villages. Hezbollah is leading the rebuilding of Lebanon, its prestige at an all time high in Lebanon, the Muslim world and beyond.

Israel is in turmoil. Former Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has decried the “mismanagement of the War” in the Knesset, and vowed that Israel will learn from its mistakes.

The fear and hatred generated by this brutal war of aggression makes peace more remote.

Probably 1200 Lebanese were killed, 75 percent civilian, and 140 Israelis, 80 percent military, with thousands injured, and an estimated $10 billion in property damage in Lebanon, 99 percent civilian.

How long can the American people accept a President who places himself above the law, who repeatedly wages wars of aggression, authorizes excessive force, the targeting of civilians, indiscriminate destruction, collective punishment, torture, disappearance, unlimited, illegal detention and dismisses them all with lies? How long will our nation endure this war by and against terrorism that he is creating?

Lebanon had hurt no one. It will be decades before it recovers if let alone. Like Palestine and Iraq it is a land of diverse and wonderful peoples of ancient and modern cultures. Beirut is one of the most glorious cities of the Mediterranean with snow capped mountains an hour's drive away. There are still stands of virgin cedars from which Solomon’s Temple in Jerusalem was built in peaceful commerce. Two thousand six hundred years ago, the prophet Ezekiel wrote of Tyre as a place “of perfect beauty... Thy borders are in the midst of the sea... Thy builders have perfected thy beauty...” truth that millions of people have observed over the millenniums. Today Tyre lays in ruin once again from Israeli assault as the world has witnessed by television.

Can we doubt that President Bush will attack yet another country, if We, the People, fail to do our duty? Can he learn that you make more friends by helping feed children than by killing them?

We must act to Impeach George W. Bush and his criminal cohorts now.

We've placed ads in the New York Times, the San Francisco Chronicle, the Boston Globe, USA Today and other papers, and each time we do we bring thousands of new people into the impeachment movement who become a growing force putting pressure on their Congressional representatives to introduce articles of impeachment. Help finance a fall nationwide newspaper campaign for impeachment, including your local paper.

Sincerely,
Ramsey Clark

CaptPostMod wrote:

SSDD, huh?

What?

GhostTrax wrote:

CaptPostMod wrote: SSDD, huh? What?

Means-- Same sh*t, different day

9/11/2001.
The official version is that Plane 1 (AA Flight 11) struck the North Tower, WTC, Plane 2 (United Flight 175) struck the South Tower, Plane 3 (AA Flight 77) struck the Pentagon, and Plane 4 (United Flight 93) was supposed to be headed toward the Capitol or the White House.

Now, I say, Planes 1, 2, 3, and 4 because this is how it went down chronologically. I try to think about the effect if the order of events that day were different. And if you think about it for a sec, you probably could imagine it as well. We have been presented with the "attacks" from the vantage point of a "viewer", an audience. The fact is, from the position of the passengers of any of the planes, there would likely have only been plane 1 - their plane. And while the order of events make the resistance on 93 seem especially heroic in the face of 3 woefully unresisted strikes - from an audience point of view, in retrospect it seems odd. Why this plane and no other? Was this group of passengers more aware of what was going on and were in a postion to act accordingly?

From the point of view of the "terrorists", the order would be by primary target and then down the line. If we go by the order of strikes and the subsequent media coverage, then the WTC seemed to have been the primary target. But why such focus on WTC, which is mainly a civilian target, if you also have the military and political leadership targeted as well? It seems obvious that these attacks were intended for an emotional reaction rather than actual realised damage. So which target would provoke the greatest consternation? If, as V said, 'a building is a symbol, as is the act of destroying it', which attack would make the most appropriate symbol?

So, then, why this sequence? Perhaps flight schedules were off like usual so the planes weren't available in the order that was desired. But even if that were so, why such minimal damage to military targets and such overkill on the civilian one (2 planes to WTC!)

If these acts of terrorism are supposed to be, as we have been solicited to believe, in retaliation for US foreign policy, does it make sense in this context to send the last plane (93) in the direction of those who form such policy, the next to the last plane in the direction of those who carry it out, and strike first and hard at those who have little to nothing to do with it?

The more I look at this, the more it seems to make sense only when viewed from the position of an "audience" and the more convinced I am that this is the intended way to look at it. The Hollywood cliched plot progressions really show throughout. You have a huge problem/dilemna/tragedy (WTC), you have a secondary act to reinforce the villainy of the first tragedy (Pentagon), and then you have the resistance show up in act 3 and unexpected resolution (the "attacks" end in a "defeat" for the "villains" in missing their "goal"). Roll credits.

The worst action movies have followed this formula too much for it to escape notice here. Too often, plot potential is sacrificed when following this formula. Holes are exposed when scrutiny is pointed at the actions of the characters. But I digress. (OR NOT)

You will notice that this post was not a so-called conspiracy theory. Everything said here was given some previous thought and presented with sound thinking, not too much jumps in logic, I hope.

If you wee what I see, then you know what to do. If not, then let this 15th of September pass by unnoticed.

intell wrote:

The fact is, from the position of the passengers of any of the planes, there would likely have only been plane 1 - their plane. And while the order of events make the resistance on 93 seem especially heroic in the face of 3 woefully unresisted strikes - from an audience point of view, in retrospect it seems odd. Why this plane and no other? Was this group of passengers more aware of what was going on and were in a postion to act accordingly?

Very interesting thoughts Intell ...

And, where there any "terrorists" at all? There is a new homevideo online, where two women are filming the towers, and after the second plane strikes, they say "it was a military plane, it was a military plane!"

And, a dutch controlled demolition expert, who did not know about WTC 7, took one look and said it was a controlled demo:

There was an interesting article in last week's Time about the non-official views of how the Towers fell. Might be worth your time to hunt down GhostTrax.

CaptPostMod wrote:

There was an interesting article in last week's Time about the non-official views of how the Towers fell. Might be worth your time to hunt down GhostTrax.

Thanks dude!

I think this is quite funny - "I believe that 19 guys with knives and a caveman defeated the most powerful nation on earth all by themselves, but I don't believe in conspiracy theories - contradiction anyone?"

Absolutely.

GhostTrax wrote:

The images of the towers disintegrating where intended to shock, nothing more, a psychological attack...

I highlight what you say here because this is actually what everyone pretty much agree on. The question is, who's attacking the psyche of the public?

If it were a foreign-based terrorist organisation that "hates us for our freedom", the Statue of Liberty would be a target that would send that message without the carnage that really happened (and without suicide). But doing that might not whip up public opinion in favor of revenge. Revenge is sought when lives are lost, so why would a group of poorly armed cave dwellers want the 21st century equivalent of the Roman Legion raining down on their doorstep? Or if lives are going to be lost, why not make it the lives of the ones they believe deserve it more - military and political leadership?

The message seems to be: "these guys tried to take out our government, we gotta bust these boys up!" Why "tried"? Why is it the the leaders always end up unscathed and the workers in the WTC end up dead? Because of some special circumstances that happened only on the plane heading toward them?

I'm sorry, but too many Steven Seagal movies have been made for me to buy it actually occuring like that.

intell wrote:

The question is, who's attacking the psyche of the public?

The ones who said they needed a new pearl harbor a year before, the ones who had already planned the Iraq invasion etc etc, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld and so on.

intell wrote:

If it were a foreign-based terrorist organisation that "hates us for our freedom", the Statue of Liberty would be a target that would send that message without the carnage that really happened (and without suicide).

Exactly, what better symbol of freedom than that.

intell wrote:

so why would a group of poorly armed cave dwellers want the 21st century equivalent of the Roman Legion raining down on their doorstep? Or if lives are going to be lost, why not make it the lives of the ones they believe deserve it more - military and political leadership?

These are questions that the ones who believe the official story should be asking themselves, but aren't.

Check this out, and pay attention to the lyrics:

The lyrics are hard-hitting and accurately reflect the Pre-Sept. 11 US govt. and Al-Quaeda relationship.

It seems to me that the collapses were like special effects that could draw an emotional response everytime the clip would be shown in the news. I don't recall seeing nearly as much footage of the Pentagon damage. To me the message is clear. But the screw up is how do you explain the collapse of the North and South Tower like you mention. They say, hot jet fuel weakend the steel supports. Now apply any of these explanations to WTC-7. That is the screw up that shows something just "wrong" about the whole thing.

intell wrote:

Now apply any of these explanations to WTC-7. That is the screw up that shows something just "wrong" about the whole thing.

Exactly, when it comes to the towers they can blame it on the planes and jet fuel, but what about WTC 7? They say it was damaged in one corner from tower debris and it was burning, but, wouldn't damage to one corner cause it to topple over or something, not fall straight down perfectly in 6 seconds, almost free fall speed?

I recently posted a clip that showed a demolition expert seeing the collapse of WTC 7 for the first time, and he said without a doubt that it was a controlled demolition.

I definatly think that WTC 7 was the command center for the whole thing, and when it collapsed, poof, evidence gone.

GhostTrax wrote:

I definatly think that WTC 7 was the command center for the whole thing, and when it collapsed, poof, evidence gone.

Hmm. Very observant. And that video and the lyrics were deep. I had to watch/listen over and over. "Any dictator would admire the uniformity and obedience of the US media" - Noam Chomsky. Now that is sad but true. There is no Det. Finch who investigated ground zero of WTC-7 for the exact cause of its collapse. And it seems not many want to hear the result of such an investigation if there were one.

Edit:
And this anniversary was marked by "taking time to remember" what happened. But I think its time to consider why it happened and what the evidence really points to.

intell wrote:

And that video and the lyrics were deep. I had to watch/listen over and over.

Immortal Technique is pretty much the only rapper I listen to, he has important things to say and he is light years ahead of the "bling bling and bitches" hip hop.

intell wrote:

There is no Det. Finch who investigated ground zero of WTC-7 for the exact cause of its collapse. And it seems not many want to hear the result of such an investigation if there were one.

But if you think about it, a lot of people have accepted that the evidence points to an inside job.

This site is the best I think:

GhostTrax wrote:

Immortal Technique is pretty much the only rapper I listen to, he has important things to say and he is light years ahead of the "bling bling and bitches" hip hop.

I agree. Remember the days of Public Enemy, KRS-One, etc.?

GhostTrax wrote:

But if you think about it, a lot of people have accepted that the evidence points to an inside job. This site is the best I think: st911.org...

Good site. And you're right. Alot more people are starting to use their brains on stuff like this and see that the official story does not really add up.

intell wrote:

I agree. Remember the days of Public Enemy, KRS-One, etc.?

Well, not really lol. But it's great when people like Immortal makes music that can actually educate people on some pretty important matters.

intell wrote:

There is no Det. Finch who investigated ground zero of WTC-7 for the exact cause of its collapse. And it seems not many want to hear the result of such an investigation if there were one.

Well said!


I find it very hard to talk to my friends and family about "The attacks on [the] America[n people]" ("did you like that?"[in best Lewis Prothero voice]). I get embarassed when I see my sister's reaction to the movie United 93. I feel somewhat worried of being seen as "unpatriotic" when I refuse to believe what we have been told as the truth about what really happened. But there is no "V" waiting to torture my fear out of me. Sad really. I guess I'll have to do it myself.

(Begins shaving head and filling bucket with water to be dunked in).

Kozar

Kozar wrote:

I feel somewhat worried of being seen as "unpatriotic" when I refuse to believe what we have been told as the truth about what really happened.

Is it not patriotic to question a story which is obviously a lie? Is it not unpatriotic to simply accept a story just because the government says it's true?

You just have to ask your friends and family one question:

"do you really believe that 19 guys with knives and a caveman defeated the worlds most powerful nation all by themselves?"

If that's not a wild conspiracy theory, nothing is!

Listen, I stopped reading at "the fact that this man is alive is proof that loose change is bullshit" because the person who wrote that is a complete moron.

What exactly do you think would happen if Dylan Avery was murdered?

The information, that is already extremely widespread, would spread even further and gain even more credibility.

Now that wasn't so hard to figure out, now was it? .

And people only attack loose change and its creators, not 911 mysteries or 911 eyewitness and other documentaries, or other researchers.

Did you watch the David Ray Griffin clip I linked to? Didn't think so, it's hard to have your little al-Qaeda conspiracy theory completely shattered I guess.

All truth passes through three stages, first it is ridiculed, then opposed, then accepted.

We are in stage two now, on our way into stage three, and no matter how much people like yourself kick and scream, you can not stop the truth from coming out.

Loose Change Final Cut, in theaters in 2007.

Try this -

I agree that the gov't isnt telling us the entire truth...but not because they are the ones who executed 9/11...

i found this debate between david ray griffin and chip berlet...
be open minded just as i was when watched loose change...
my biggest questions all have to do with the pentagon story...

Well the government either let it happen or made it happen.