Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
9/11 Then And Now
03-25-2007, 07:52 PM,
9/11 Then And Now

Tuesday, March 20, 2007
It's the Real Thing

He drank Coca-Cola, he was eating Wonder Bread,
Ate Burger Kings - he was well fed - Bob Dylan

I really want to leave this subject alone, and you probably wish I would, too, but unfortunately I have a few more things to winge about before moving on.

You may have seen this by now: the trailer for The Ultimate Con ("the 9/11 Documentary you can't debunk"). It's creator is "Lucus," about whom all I know is that he says "Dave Vonkleist, Jack Blood, and Alex Jones are going to help me promote it," which almost says enough for me right there. It's ten minutes of mostly "I heard explosions" footage shot during the attacks, though to its credit there are some clips I hadn't seen before, such as real-time reports of an alleged bomb-laden van in the WTC garage and rumours of suspected "devices."

I don't mean to open up another can of thermate here, so I won't comment on the merit of the quadruple redundancy of car bombs, planted explosives in the basement, cutting charges and demolition squibs, except to say I wish some of those who defend the accuracy of eyewitness testimony with respect to the World Trade Center would apply the same standard to the Pentagon crash. (Consider, for instance, these 87 accounts of having seen a passenger jet, and not a cruise missile or a fighter aircraft, overfly DC and strike the building.)

Instead, let's do like the Jimmy Castor Bunch. What we're going to do right here is go back. Waaay back; back into time. When 9/11 Truth could look like the 2004 9/11 Citizens' Commission.

Go ahead, and watch The Ultimate Con. But then watch anti-fascist researcher John Judge deconstruct the official Commission report, beginning with the simple question, "Who wrote it?" Authorship is unascribed, but it's written in a "lucid, almost novelistic" fashion, with a single voice. Judge mentions the Warren Commission Report also had a single, anonymous author, brought over from the Pentagon's Army Historical Division. Otto Winnacker's previous employer had been Adolph Hitler, as one of 26 official historians of Nazi Germany.

Watch Michael Springmann, former State Department diplomat, testify that the CIA were running the Jeddah consulate, instructing officials to issue visas to terrorists for reasons of "national security." Fifteen of the 9/11 hijackers received their visas through Jeddah.

Watch Indira Singh describe her discovery of PTech's deep black links to both US security infrastructure and global narco-terror ("When I ran into the drugs I was told that if I mentioned the money to the drugs around 9/11 that would be the end of me," says Singh), the sheltering of al qaeda financier Yassin al-Qadi (he "talked very highly of his relationship" with Dick Cheney, claims PTech's CEO Oussama Ziade), and the two years PTech spent with Mitre in the "FAA's basement" prior to 911.

Watch Paul Thompson rattle off ignored intelligence, the Randy Glass story (which some may find of particular interest since Glass claims he was told by Pakistani intelligence prior to 9/11 that "those towers are coming down"), and the triangulation of the ISI, the CIA and al Qaeda. Then there are the wargames, the reconstruction of Cheney's command and control, Sibel Edmonds.....

Any wagers on how often controlled demolition is mentioned?

It's a bit wistful and over the shoulder, viewing these now: this Truth Movement moment seems much longer ago than a mere three years. Is this the same 9/11 I hear about today? Because I hear none of these things anymore. Is this the same "Truth Movement"? Because today's sounds nothing like this. Is this even the same truth?

A tough question. It's like asking Coke drinkers in the mid-80s, What is this shit?

Had Truth Classic's market share plateaued? Was its flavour too complex to break out of a niche market, or were there other reasons for finessing its formula? Because New Truth certainly goes down differently. "Smoother, rounder, yet bolder," in the stammering nonsense of Coca Cola CEO Roberto Goizueta. And in my experience it comes back up just the same.

Can you taste the difference, and can you tell what's missing? New Truth is now 100% Jihadist free.

Something less than 100% would be true enough, and would have served as a corrective to the official comic book which informs Americans that their enemy has dark skin and strange beliefs. But entirely erasing bin Laden and al Qaeda from the 9/11 equation makes no more sense - not even polemical sense - than trying to talk sensibly about the JFK assassination without mention of the Mafia or the anti-Castro Cubans. And was it any less an "inside job" for their involvement and manifold reasons for wanting him dead?

But it's impossible not to ascribe some such sentiments to racism, and sometimes something more. (For instance, neo-Nazi Curt Maynard writes, "there is considerably more tangible evidence to suggest that the United States government and Israel carried out the crime, not 19 troglodytes, i.e. cave dwellers from the Middle East.") And then there's the executive producer of Loose Change and Afghanistan war vet, Korey Rowe, who told CNN "I met my enemy and the people who supposedly pulled off this attack, and these people are not strong enough and they're not, uh, advanced enough." However, I think there is also something else happening here.

Some of the most damning evidence presented by Classic Truth is that which ties state power to supra-state terror and criminality. Peter Dale Scott's definition of Deep Politics is "the constant, everyday interaction between the constitutionally elected government and forces of violence, forces of crime, which appear to be the enemies of that government." Al Qaeda, a creature of intelligence agencies, is one such node of contemporary deep politics. As recently as the mid-90s its Mujahadeen were NATO's unambiguous partner in Bosnia, helping to secure and profit by the Balkan trade route of Afghan heroin into Europe. The CIA were demanding visas for al Qaeda operatives in the consulate of bin Laden's hometown, and an al Qaeda financier was also hardwired into Washington's security apparatus. 9/11 cells were hosted by FBI informants and their flight schools were up to their altimeters in Iran-Contra-like narco-dollars. Al Qaeda's structure was penetrated up to the senior operational level, possibly including assets of ambiguous loyalty who helped plan and fund the attacks. (For instance Fort Bragg instructor and FBI informant Ali Mohammed, who trained those involved in the 1993 WTC bombing, oversaw al Qaeda's relocation to Afghanistan and taught hijackers how to smuggle box cutters onto aircraft.)

New Truth hamstrings itself - and perhaps on the part of some, that's the entire point of New Truth - by clearing the table of everything pertaining to al Qaeda and defining "inside job" as merely "inside the Beltway." Because it is by their parapolitical linkages to, and patronage of, the very forces of violence which appear to be their enemy, that governments most condemn themselves.

Doing away with all that does away with much of the High Crime, which a few might think a good thing. Watch the 2004 videos. How does the health and rigor and scope of New Truth compare? Which do you think the High Criminals prefer?

Someone told me recently that "common sense shows that CD is the 'back and to the left' of 9/11." That's the problem. It is. Look at where 40 years of "back and to the left" has got John Kennedy.

This article highlights some important things. It feels like 9/11 truth is bending away from hardcore facts and presenting too much "video evidence" to feed to the newcomers. It is sort of like the Kennedy assassination, where people were so hung up about the different home videos/Zapruder film and the Magic Bullet theory, that they didn't focus on the who did it and why.
The belief in 'coincidence' is the prevalent superstition of the Age of Science.

&I don't understand why you're taking such a belligerant tone when you're obviously the ignorant one here. &
03-26-2007, 08:27 AM, (This post was last modified: 03-26-2007, 08:27 AM by Moriani.)
9/11 Then And Now
Quote:Watch Michael Springmann, former State Department diplomat, testify that the CIA were running the Jeddah consulate, instructing officials to issue visas to terrorists for reasons of "national security." Fifteen of the 9/11 hijackers received their visas through Jeddah.

That would conflict with certain facts and reports. 13 of the alleged hijackers applied for visas at the Jeddah consulate, but only 7 were approved. 12 of the 13 applied for visas after the Silverstein WTC lease deal was approved. Sivlerstein did not get the winning bid. A a Jew-owned real estate company got the bid but suddenly backed out of the WTC lease which was then leased to Sivlerstein (who is also a Jew).

Six of those 12 alleged hijackers entered the US without a visa. Officially, the US is unable to account for how, where or when they entered the US.
03-26-2007, 10:17 AM,
9/11 Then And Now
The person who wrote this is just trying to be cool.
[Image: paulbanneroc1.gif]
03-28-2007, 03:23 AM,
9/11 Then And Now
I don't think he is trying to be cool. And that's an easy cop out answer.

Quote:6. Joel from Niagara 7 hours ago

its funny how people think the wtc was blown up. if you search for videos on building implosions they fall down completely different than the wtc did...

Tony DeRosa from University of Richmond 5 hours ago

We´re talking about GWB, by the way, as an alleged mastermind of a huge government conspiracy. Is he honestly capable? Also, Popular Mechanics debunked everything in Loose Change. Check out Maddox´site for links and a hilarious article on it.

Jay from University of Arkansas - Fayetteville 5 hours ago

the only proof they have towards a conspiracy is pictures, which we all know these days can be cropped and shopped to anyone's liking.

MrRabbit from La Salle 5 hours ago

Loose Change? Heh, I've seen it. That's part of what has me convinced that this is all a big joke you guys are playing the smart people.

That "movie" is full of some of the funniest shit I've ever seen.

AC Slater from University of New Hampshire 6 minutes ago

the voices on flight 93 were high tec voice recognition and computer copies!! LIKE OH. MY. GOD.

These are all responses on college humor I got from this thread

The point being that most people are fucking retarded and we're trying to convince them with VIDEO evidence. It's the wrong tactic if you ask me.

What I want is for people at that same site to be slamming them with facts of the CIA/FBI involvement with the hijackers and Pakistani intelligence money transfers. We are giving them things they can ignorantly deny. And honestly LC does suck. IMO it's the worst thing to happen to 9/11 truth movement. Sure it got a lot of people involved, but it gave more people a reason to call us retarded and look no further. It has been the biggest sheep cop-out to date. It seems like all they say is "9/11 conspiracy is dumb, LC is loltarded" and it ends the debate for them right there. It's a cognitive dissonance piece.

Were taking the debate down to their level so that they get involved. What we should be doing is actively trying to raise their level to ours and showing them the truth. I feel the video evidence is enough proof, but remember we are dealing with retards. Lets try educating them instead of leaving them at the dumbed down level the NWO wants them to be at.
The belief in 'coincidence' is the prevalent superstition of the Age of Science.

&I don't understand why you're taking such a belligerant tone when you're obviously the ignorant one here. &
03-28-2007, 12:39 PM, (This post was last modified: 03-28-2007, 12:42 PM by PSX.)
9/11 Then And Now
Good points, harf, in 2005 when LC hadn't even come close to its peak, the first documentary to be brought up on your average mainstream forum and ridiculed is Loose Change, and that's where the discussion would end

I always had hope that this production, with its obvious flaws of being too one-dimensional, would act as a catalyst for the majority and give them motivation to do their own research and fact-finding, and not be falsely interpreted as the biggest and the best, without second thoughts about additional, more solid information available in the public domain

"What comes to mind when I say '9/11' and 'Documentary'?"

"Loose Change"

"Have you tried verifying, and expanding upon, the information in this film?"

"No, it just sounds like bullshit to me, why should I waste my time?"

There's nothing wrong with LC being watched by inquiring minds, but the mentality of the masses is incredibly corrupt and being spoon fed on these topics in rapid-fire succession doesn't necessarily help, each person has to seek their own enlightenment one step at a time
I don't see how when these people get on tv and talk like this that they don't just bust out laughing. I sure would, &phhheeh, sorry folks, haha, I can't read this anymore. Truth is, we're scamming the holy shit out of all of you. We're large, and in charge. Illuminati is in the hizzouse! East Sah-eeeed!& -Henry
03-28-2007, 04:17 PM,
9/11 Then And Now
I don't think the the bunkers are bunk, I think the debunkers are full of bunk.

But the original researchers are calling the media bunk.

Paid media debukers call the researchers bunk.

The media must survive.

911 and UFOs, its all the same bunch, stand up and be counted:

Quote:The U.S. government (N.S.A., O.S.I.), on behalf of the Trilateral Commission, continues with and enforces a Nazi-originated "Big Lie" program, in which it perpetuates the hoax that flying saucers ("U.F.O.s") are: (a) Extraterrestrial in origin; (B)psychological phenomena ("collective consciousness archetypal images", ala C. G. Jung); © swamp gas; (d) "free-floating plasmas"; (e) piezo-electric effects; (f) ball-lightning; (g) other natural phenomena; (h) unknown life forms; (i) hallucinations; (j) non-existent; (k)hoaxes by attention-seekers; (l)the products of hysteria, insanity, etc., etc.


If you can fool everyone all the time like 911, then Lyne being a tiny right might mean
a great deal.

You can't fight the media. But why join them.
03-29-2007, 05:52 PM,
9/11 Then And Now
Quote:You may have seen this by now: the trailer for The Ultimate Con ("the 9/11 Documentary you can't debunk").

Man thanks for the link

we all know it was just like they showed in the movie 'Flight 93' down to the last word even if mobile phones won't work at 50,000 ft so lets rock and roll.

if you fancey some bed time read then may i recomend the offical 9/11 story as published by the FBI
9/11 was an inside job and the economy is going into meltdown so keep some spare food put by just in case justice is right.

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)