(Below is the Oregonian's recent unsigned editorial on doubts surrounding the UK airline plot and 9/11 entitled, "The Cult of Unbelief" followed by my letter to the editors in response.) Within days after British authorities said thay had disrupted a play intended to attack air traffic between England and the United States, a cadre of correspondents and bloggers expressed doubt. "Bush and Blair," wrote British broadcaster Craig Murray, the U.K.'s former ambassador to Usbekistan, "both in desperate domestic political trouble...longed for 'Another 9/11'." Murray surmises that the terror plot was an empty threat, and that the timing of its arrests was "deeply political." Murray's article flew around the Internet, forwarded by many of the same people convinced that World Trade Center Towers One and Two and Building Seven were brought down on 9/11 by controlled demolitions, with government connivance. The purpose of this, the conted, was to give the Bush administration a New Pearl Harbor" -- a cause that would alow the Whit House to rearange the federal budget, curtail civil liberties and go to war. It's a dark view, but it's perhaps worth remembering that the real Pearl Harbor has skeptics, too. Robert Stinnett, for example, wrote a book concluding that Franklin Roosevelt provoked Japan to attackPeral Harbor in order to proceed with his plan to build an overwhelming, two-ocean navy and join World War II on the side of Great Britain. history views few skeptics heroically. But skepticism must be grounded in truth and not pursued for its own sake. The current clamor, based on a string of conjectures, smacks more of Oliver Stone than of Galileo.
To the editors,
I read with deep dismay your dismissive, insulting piece "The Cult of Unbelief" (Aug. 23, 2006). Your board walks in lockstep with the propagandist corporate media that refuses to broadcast or print the actual evidence, openly and honestly, surrounding the 9/11 events. Whether it is intentional suppression, bought and paid for by corporate masters or mere bovine incuriosity, is not the issue. What matters is that YOU, all of you, professionally and personally, if you do NOTHING to show the facts and evidence about 9/11, must by your negligence accept complicity in ongoing monstrous acts of public delusion and disinformation. This is a Big Lie of Hitlerian proportions, and you are actively promoting it by your abject negligence of coverage.
Have you reported that several of the "hijackers" are alive? That the official 9/11 myth violates numerous laws of physics with no explanation? That the Gulf of Tonkin, Operation Northwoods, and the USS Liberty attack were all real or planned state-sponsored "false-flag" terror attacks? That World Trade Center 7, a 47 story steel framed skyscraper, was not hit by any plane but fell in the exact manner as the Trojan cooling tower, many hours after the Twin Towers exploded (due to "fire")? That numerous war games in progress on 9/11 were scheduled by Dick Cheney to simulate the precise events that actually occurred on that day? All these facts are publically known and documented. They are "well grounded in truth" and proven unlike the unsubstantiated theories espoused by the 9/11 Commission Report.
So if you have any journalistic interest whatsoever in what you derisively call "the current clamor" I challenge each and every one of you, to look at the evidence and decide for yourself. Forget about the "string of conjectures" and chattering bloggers you abhor. Find out for yourselves and actually learn the facts about what happened. The facts and evidence are well publicized by the "free press" even while your paper supresses them.
I myself was horrified when earlier this year I looked up from my intense study of the election crisis in this country to peer beneath the surface of the grotesque charade of the 9/11 official story. It is not easy to face the truth. But in the sincere hope you will accept my invitation to explore a fact-based reality, I offer you many resources below. I also cordially invite you to attend a screening on 9/10 of a documentary film entitled "9/11 Press for Truth" based on the pioneering book "The Terror Timeline" by Paul Thompson (details below). These resources will help you investigate the depth and disgrace of the crimes against truth committed by this tragic administration. Perhaps this will right an imbalance in your current reporting on this topic, which, based on sheer government propaganda, smacks more of a newsletter from the Flat Earth Society than of journalism.
Virginia L. Ross, Attorney
PDX 9/11 Truth Alliance
"9/11 Press for Truth" at Cinemagic, 20th & SE Hawthorne on Sunday 9/10 from 1pm to 5pm (Feature Film followed by videos from the L.A. Conference recently featured on C-Span and Q&A)
RESOURCES FOR INVESTIGATING THE TRUTH ABOUT 9/11
(Credit to Mark Rabinowitz for his excellent research at www.oilempire.us)
Best books about 9/11
Crossing the Rubicon: the Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil, by Michael Ruppert www.fromthewilderness.com
The Terror Timeline: Year by Year, Day by Day, Minute by Minute, by Paul Thompson www.cooperativeresearch.org
The War on Truth: 9/11, Disinformation and the Anatomy of Terrorism, by Nafeez Mossadeq Ahmed
Best movies about 9/11
The Truth and Lies of 9/11
Michael Ruppert's first speech after 9/11, still accurate after all these years.
Denial Stops Here: From 9/11 to Peak Oil and Beyond
Updated presentation from Michael Ruppert (2005), good summary of 9/11 wargames and the context of Peak Oil (a bit choppy in the production, but excellent information that is mandatory viewing for everyone interested in 9/11 truth).
9/11 Citizens Commission (New York City, September 9, 2004)
best single video presentation on 9/11 complicity, from a forum with Cynthia McKinney, John Judge, Michael Ruppert, Indira Singh, Barrie Zwicker, Nicholas Levis, Jenna Orkin and others. Probably the least promoted 9/11 truth video, perhaps because it avoids the "no plane" hoaxes and it is extremely compelling and credible. A similar, much more flawed event called "Confronting the Evidence" was held in New York City on September 11, 2004 which did focus on the hoaxes (a mix of good information and nonsense) and has received much more publicity.
The Great Deception
First video to raise issues of 9/11 complicity - published by Barrie Zwicker in January and February 2002.
The Great Conspiracy: the 9/11 News Special You Never Saw
Barrie Zwicker's 2004 sequel to The Great Deception. It is a full length documentary that updates the earlier work. A very good production (for the most part), but the finale includes Thierry Meyssan's "no plane hit Pentagon" hoax.
The Power of Nightmares
a BBC documentary on the rise of the American neo-conservatives and the rise of the radical Islamists, accepts the official story of 9/11 (supposedly a surprise attack) but otherwise is the best history of the circumstances that led to 9/11.
Press for Truth
2006 documentary about Paul Thompson (author of the Complete 9/11 Timeline) and the "Jersey Girls" (widows who demanded a real investigation, which they did not get)
Best 9/11 truth websites
Best 9/11 "blog" (web-log)
Rigorous Intuition - http://rigint.blogspot.com - written by Jeff Wells (in Toronto, Canada)
Best research guides
The Complete 9/11 Timeline from the Center for Cooperative Research
From the Wilderness
Best "physical evidence" website
Jim Hoffman's websites at 911review.com and http://911research.wtc7.net are the most credible, carefully documented websites focused on the physical evidence issues of 9/11. They are part of the best efforts to separate the real from the fake claims on 9/11.
Best analysis of al-Qaeda's role in 9/11
"Peeling the Onion," written by an intelligence insider on the evening of 9/11/2001 - archived at www.oilempire.us/qaeda.html
Best article about Israel's role in 9/11
Journalist Wayne Madsen's article "Waking Up From Our Global Nightmare" published just before the 2004 "election" is the best and most credible article about Israeli involvement in 9/11.
Best documentation of Pakistan's involvement in 9/11
The Complete 9/11 Timeline from the Center for Cooperative Research has a good section about Pakistan's roles.
Best 9/11 whistleblowers (most credible)
FBI agents investigating the flight schools and al-Qaeda connected money laundering before 9/11:
Coleen Rowley - coleenrowley.com - her Congressional campaign website (running as a Democrat in Minnesota), would be interesting to see the hearings that would happen if she is elected and the Democrats take control of the House of Representatives in November 2006.
Sibel Edmonds (FBI translator muzzled for trying to expose foreknowledge)
Indira Singh (employee of Ptech)
Lieutenant Colonel Steve Butler, vice chancellor for student affairs at the Defense Language Institute in Monterey, California -- a US military facility that one or more of the hijackers reportedly attended during the 1990s.
"Of course President Bush knew about the impending attacks on America. He did nothing to warn the American people because he needed this war on terrorism. His daddy had Saddam and he needed Osama. His presidency was going nowhere. He wasn't elected by the American people, but placed in the Oval Office by a conservative supreme court. The economy was sliding into the usual Republican pits and he needed something on which to hang his presidency.... This guy is a joke. What is sleazy and contemptible is the President of the United States not telling the American people what he knows for political gain."
Able Danger officers
for more details on the whistleblowers:
Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil, by Michael Ruppert www.fromthewilderness.com (read the chapter on the FBI whistleblowers for details)
The Big Wedding: 9/11, the Whistleblowers, and the Cover-up, by Sander Hicks www.sanderhicks.com (Randy Glass, Delmart Vreeland,
Welcome to Terrorland: Mohammed Atta and the 9-11 Cover-up in Florida, by Daniel Hopsicker www.madcowprod.com (best - and only - investigation of the Florida flight schools used by some of the 9/11 plotters)
Indira Singh's testimony to the 9/11 Citizens Commission, New York City, September 9, 2004
Best 9/11 truth
Deception Dollars - a satirical spoof of the American dollar bill that promotes websites that discuss 9/11 complicity. Over six million deception dollars were distributed at peace rallies and other events from late 2002 through 2005, and were extremely popular with crowds (many who passed them out in public found it hard to pass them out fast enough). The existence of the Deception Dollar campaign was censored from the media - both mainstream and "alternative" - despite the very public aspect of this effort. Unfortunately, every edition of the Deception Dollar included a couple websites that base their claims on hoaxes (some seem deliberate, others are merely incompetent), so the Deception Dollar list should not be taken as an automatic list of a guide to the best evidence.
Best explanation of why 9/11 was allowed (and assisted)
9/11 was allowed to happen (and given technical assistance to make sure it happened) as part of a covert plan to prepare the US empire for Peak Oil. 9/11 provided the excuse for the war to seize the Iraqi oil fields (part of a larger scheme to dominate the remaining oil supplies). 9/11 also enabled passage of the USA Patriot Act and other repressive policies that are part of the long-planned Homeland Security surveillance society. 9/11 was the pretext for the "War on Terror," which its supporters claim is a "war that will not end in our lifetime." The neo-conservatives call this conflict World War IV.
Best documented evidence
The failure to follow standard operating procedures (suppressed warnings, blocked investigations, Bush reading "the Pet Goat" instead of being Commander-in-Chief, the Air Force failure to intercept hijacked jets)
Wargames simulating the actual events simultaneously that seem to have confused the air defenses.
WHERE Flight 77 hit - the nearly empty, recently reconstructed and strengthened sector
WHAT hit the Pentagon - Flight 77, probably electronically hijacked
HOW the air defenses did not protect the Pentagon, even after the towers had been hit
WHO scheduled multiple war game exercises on 9/11, including a "plane into building" scenario
WHY 9/11 was allowed to happen (and given technical assistance): Peak Oil and Homeland Security
Best theory of how 9/11 happened
The most likely scenario, which fits the known evidence, is "hijack the hijackers with remote control."iIn this view, the hijackers were allowed to finish their preparations, board the planes, hijack the controls but then remote control technology was used to ensure that the planes not only completed their missions but also did not strike targets that would have caused even more damage. Flight 11, the first hijacked plane, flew over Indian Point nuclear power station, just north of New York City (an attack there would have been much, much worse than 9/11). And if Flight 77 had hit any other part of the Pentagon, thousands of people could have been killed. This hybrid scenario is speculative, but remote control flight technology is commercially available. One of the manufacturers of this equipment is System Planning corporation, whose former director, Dov Zakheim, was a signer of the "PNAC" report stating a New Pearl Harbor would enable their global domination goals. Mr Zakheim was Comptroller of the Pentagon from 2001 through early 2004 (in charge of the money).ng the Hijackers
I've long thought that if we assume a decision had been taken to let it happen, then we should expect that measures were be taken to ensure it happened precisely as desired, and spectacularly so. With so much at stake, nothing would be left to the skill and luck of the 19 hijackers. Flight 77's 270 degree turn to hit the ground floor of the virtually unoccupied side of the Pentagon, while supposedly piloted by the grossly incompetent Hani Hanjour, is the most striking example. The recent report that the WTC black boxes were recovered after all, is suggestive of the same: that the data conflicted somehow with the received fiction. Perhaps the hijackers were themselves hijacked.
from Nicholas Levis, summeroftruth.org:
"Staging 9/11 as an inside job is going to work best (in fact, is likely to work only) if there actually exists an active network of anti-American terrorists who are deeply committed to killing Americans in response to U.S. policy. In other words, those who would blame Qaeda need a (relatively) real Qaeda. A partly-real enemy is much better than an entirely fabricated one.
"The most robust way for insider masterminds to stage 9/11 and get away with it is to arrange for their agents to infiltrate among "real foreign terrorists." Let them come up with their own plots (or plant plots among them), choose a plot that will produce the results desired by the masterminds, and see that through to fruition. At some point, the masterminds and their agents will hijack the plot from the would-be hijackers, to make sure it happens. You won't risk the whole game on the ability of amateurs to get away with it, you will help them along or even replace them (with a remote control hijacking, for example). But it's best to have "real terrorists" in play. They leave a more solid trail of evidence internationally. Cops and agents and academics of two dozen countries can honestly confirm the existence of an al-Qaeda network. That way there is less need to initiate outside observers into the plot and you don't have to hope they are all stupid, as they would have to be to fall for a complete fabrication of "Qaeda." (Qaeda at this point is just a term of convenience for the Islamist extremist networks.)
"The best result would be for a whole bunch of Islamist extremists running around believing that their crew pulled off 9/11 all by themselves (how inspiring for them!). The patsies should believe they actually did it. This was the case with the Reichstag Fire and Marinus van der Lubbe: the patsy believed he had done it."
Best evidence for remote control planes
Some coincidence theorists claim that it was a one-in-five chance that the nearly empty part of the Pentagon was hit, even though the flight maneuvers were world class precision flying and it is impossible to believe that a terrorist intent on causing as much damage as possible would have flown around the Pentagon to ensure that the one area with the fewest victims would be hit.
It is likely, but unprovable, that some form of remote control technology was used to steer Flight 77 into the nearly empty, recently reconstructed part of the Pentagon. Even an expert pilot substituted for flight school dropout and alleged terrorist Hani Hanjour would not have made the amazing flight pattern to minimize casualties on the ground by hitting the nearly empty part of the Pentagon.
The data on the black boxes (supposedly found from all four planes) would refute or confirm the remote control hypothesis, but this information has not been made public. Few 9/11 "truth" activists have focused their attention on this secret data, preferring instead to desire the videos of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon (which would not tell us anything we don't already know).
Best historical precedent
The 1933 Reichstag Fire, which was allowed to happen (the lone arsonist had been overheard boasting that he wanted to burn the building) and given technical assistance (SS goons were in the basement with barrels of fuel while the patsy was upstairs trying to set fires) to make sure it happened.
The 1941 Pearl Harbor attack was allowed to happen to galvanize public opinion to support war, but President Roosevelt did not need to provide technical assistance to the Japanese (they could find Hawaii without any assistance). Pearl Harbor did not involve a "stand down" -- merely a refusal to share critical intelligence with Army and Navy commanders in Hawaii who would have taken defensive measures if they knew the attacks were imminent.
Other historical precedents (similar but not exactly the same) are described at www.oilempire.us/parallels.html
Best "physical evidence" (for remote control)
Flight 77 was steered into the mostly empty, recently reconstructed and strengthened sector of the Pentagon. This fact is accepted by the mainstream media - but it is rarely focused upon. It is strong evidence (but not proof) that some form of remote control was used to ensure that the planes caused enough havoc and destruction for the "shock and awe" but not uncontrollable damage (if Flight 77 had hit any other part of the Pentagon, the recovery would have been far more difficult).
Best areas for further investigation (an unlikely scenario)
Able Danger - military intelligence program that was tracking the hijackers before 9/11. The Center for Cooperative Research has the best public database about this scandal.
The data on the "black boxes" (which were supposedly recovered from all four planes) would refute or confirm the remote control theory.
Best politician who dares to ask inconvenient questions
Representative Cynthia McKinney (D-Georgia)
Best questions from 9/11 family members
Best analyses of "left gatekeepers" who pretend 9/11 was a surprise attack
left gatekeepers: the stand down of the liberal, alternative media about 9/11
denial is not a river in Egypt, psychological reluctance to confront the full truth
The Nation supports the official stories of JFK (Warren Commission) and 9/11
Norman Solomon FAIR and the Institute for Public Accuracy, helped lead defense of 9/11 official story in 2002
Chip Berlet Right Woos Left: Chip Berlet defends Bush regime against claims of complicity
Democracy Now 90% of their work is good, but they avoid the most important issues
Noam Chomsky Where Noam will not roam: Chomsky manufactures consent by supporting the official stories of 9/11 and JFK
Fahrenheit 9/11 Michael Moore and setting up the invasion of Saudi Arabia
Mother Jones defends 9/11 cover-up Commission and denies vote fraud in Ohio
Ward Churchill supports "Blowback" paradigm, misses real story of 9/11 complicity
Counterpunch Alexander Cockburn ridicules investigations into 9/11 complicity and vote fraud
Alternative Radio also avoids deeper understanding
Greg Palast great work on vote fraud but not on Peak Oil or 9/11
Institute for Policy Studies "progressive" party line
Inter Press Service liberal news service that dismissed 9/11 International Inquiry in Toronto (May 2004)
MoveOn Democratic Trojan Horse to control dissent
Larry Bensky Pacifica Radio correspondent
Best smears in the media against 9/11 skepticism
Two of the best (most subtle) smears about 9/11 "truth" were an April 29, 2006 USA Today front page review of Loose Change and Mark Morford's promotion of Loose Change in the San Francisco Chronicle on March 29, 2006. Several USA Today reporters saw Flight 77 hit the Pentagon while they were driving to work (their offices are not far from the Pentagon). Therefore, the fact this publication chose to highlight a film claiming Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon is not a compliment - presumably USA Today (like other media publications) understands that this is one of the fake claims about complicity. While one of the 9/11 war games is known due (in part) to a USA Today story in 2004, this newspaper does not dare list all of the 9/11 war games that are publicly known nor the implication of the simultaneous exercises that day, especially those that resembled real world events. Morford's articles on 9/11 complicity issues are more subtle still - they seem to support the grassroots efforts to investigate yet steer the reader toward the "no plane" claims, away from the real evidence.
Best hoax: Rumsfeld's "Pentagon missile" hoax is the most important disinformation masquerading as 9/11 truth
purpose: alienate those in DC and discredit the skeptics
an introduction to the "no plane" claims
State Department "Identifying Misinformation" website: a Rosetta Stone to understand 9/11 disinformation
politics and psychology of disinformation
history of "no planes on 9/11" - hoaxes about all four crashes
Pentagon Truth: 9/11 activists debunk the missile hoax
media focus on the hoaxes, ignore best evidence
fake debate: no plane or no complicity? neither is true
similar sabotage against the JFK Truth Movement
TV Minds Propagandized by Photos - electronic hypnosis
Karl Rove uses fake evidence to discredit real scandals
reverse psychology: "new" Pentagon video released May 16, 2006, hiding images fuels hoaxes - it is bait
the 757-sized hole and photos of Boeing parts
suppressed evidence: Flight 77 black boxes found
Eyewitnesses: hundreds of people saw Flight 77, no one saw a missile or small plane hit the building
photos of Pentagon area for those unfamiliar with Washington, D.C.
jokes hidden in plain sight: Pentagate, In Plane Site, Popular Mechanics
In Plane Site, Pentagon Strike, Loose Change ("no plane" hoax films)
no-plane hoax promoters (some are sincere, some are not)
the "pod" plane (a hoax about the WTC plane crashes, 9/11 "pod people")
"This war on terrorism is bogus - The 9/11 attacks gave the US an ideal pretext to use force to secure its global domination"
Michael Meacher Saturday September 6, 2003 The Guardian
(environment minister for Tony Blair from 1997 to 2003, Member of the British Parliament)
The overriding motivation for this political smokescreen is that the US and the UK are beginning to run out of secure hydrocarbon energy supplies. By 2010 the Muslim world will control as much as 60% of the world's oil production and, even more importantly, 95% of remaining global oil export capacity. As demand is increasing, so supply is decreasing, continually since the 1960s.
9/11 Evidence - Smoking Gun ... by Cheryl Seal
also at www.unknownnews.net/cdd052002.html
one of the best articles describing the evidence and the motivations, warnings, the curious nature of the Pentagon attack (on the mostly empty part of the building), the Bush administration's interference with the FBI investigation of al-Qaeda, and much more. One of the best articles pointing out the likelihood of remote control of the four planes (hijacking the hijackers).
At the very least Bush allowed 9/11 to happen. But the evidence indicates his guilt involves more than just a huge intentional sin of omission – this now seems certain. ...
.... why would Bush admit to having been warned about 9/11 in the first place? In the corporate and political world, this admission is a strategy that has been used over and over by creeps who are guilty of huge crimes and know the heat is on. By confessing to a lesser charge, they try to draw the heat away from the main, more dangerous issue.
The miraculous timing of the 9/11 skyjackers, Part 1
by margieburns on Thu 06 Jul 2006
"The Fog of War Games" -- the miraculous timing of the skyjackers, part 2
by margieburns on Sat Jul 8 18:23 2006
The war on paperclips
I worry that I'm turning into a conspiracy theorist
Wednesday May 11, 2005
OK, I'm paranoid and depressed. My new government of troglodytes, murderers and spivs barely elongates the customary scream I give upon waking. What troubles me more is our rulers' inevitable recommencement of the war on terror bollocks.
To begin at what we're told is the beginning, we have 9/11 - the one in the US, not the earlier one in Chile when covert US government intervention killed thousands of innocents and handed the country to a commerce-friendly, torture-loving, far-right junta. Now if 9/11/2001 is so important, why is it so hard to find out what happened?
The FBI, as we know, blocked all manner of investigations into the plot in the run up to its execution, whether these involved highly specific warnings from its own agents or from government sources in Afghanistan, Argentina, Britain, the Cayman Islands, Egypt, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Jordan, Morocco and Russia.
Meanwhile, I worry why the nearest military aircraft weren't scrambled to intercept any of the hijacked flights when this is standard procedure and why, when more distant jets were finally aloft, they flew at less than half speed, thus failing to prevent the impacts at the twin towers and then, it would seem, managing to shoot down Flight 93 when its passengers may already have overcome its hijackers.
It would, of course, be easier to know what happened to Flight 93 if there weren't - according to educated estimates - three minutes of the cockpit recording missing. It would, equally, be handy to have access to the black boxes from the other crashes. Firefighters at Ground Zero have repeatedly stated that three of the four possible black boxes there were found and taken away by government agents.
And these worries are maybe less important than the ones about clear links between the Pakistani ISI, the CIA and the men named as the 9/11 hijackers. Or the mysterious inability of anyone to capture Osama bin Laden, who fled from Tora Bora, possibly being evacuated by helicopter, and then escaped to Pakistan unhindered.
So while Chinese paperclips are now made out of vital 9/11 evidence and almost every implicated party goes free, we and our controlling US interests continue fearlessly to terrorise countries unconnected with the attacks, to place permanent military bases near oil reserves and pipeline routes, to harass and murder Muslims anywhere we can, and to foment terrorist resistance at every opportunity. The UK unmasks non-existent ricin plots and threatens us with ID cards, but we can't supply our troops in Iraq with working radios or a legal causus belli.
But you'd never want to think that on 9/11/2001 covert US government intervention killed thousands of innocents and handed the country, if not the world, to a commerce-friendly, torture-loving, far-right junta. That would make you a paranoid, depressed conspiracy theorist. And, take it from me, that just wouldn't be comfortable.
HOPSICKER: See the basic story is and I need to tell you in just 30 seconds is [that] the government’s story is that I call the Magic Dutch Boy theory. Remember the Kennedy assassination when the "magic bullet" has passed thru three people, the only way they could make a story of one lone gunman even remotely logically possible?
HICKS Most of the people never bought that and still don’t.
HOPSICKER: Similarly, in 9/11, it’s only through the Magic Dutch Boy theory that you can believe these people came over here without the knowledge and consent of the U.S. government. The government’s story is that the year before the terrorists began to arrive in force, two separate Dutch nationals purchased separately the two flight schools at the Venice, Florida, airport, that, eight or nine months afterward, began training terrorists how to fly.
HICKS: Right. But when it all sort of fell apart, both Dutch nationals happened to have two separate aircraft accidents.
HOPSICKER: That’s correct. They are inconvenient people at this point, because if either one of them ever talked, it could bring down the government of the current administration.
Top ten conspiracy theories of 2002
OF BIG OIL, BY BIG OIL, FOR BIG OIL
The 10 Most Startling Speculations and "Conspiracy Theories" About September 11 and America's New War
[27 December 2002]
by Mike Ward
Top Ten Conspiracy Theories of 2002
Courtesy of Indymedia New York, Mike Ward of PopMatters lists the most outrageous top ten officially spun conspiracy theories of the year - Scoop Editor's Note: If you feel like a laugh then read this!
He forgot to mention the most outlandish conspiracy of them all (and the most widely accepted): 19 hijackers from a third world terrorist group armed with boxcutters forced 3 planes into 3 of the the nation's most important and symbolic structures with no assistance from US government/intelligence insiders.
JFK, 9/11 and the REAL America
Tying It All Together
by: Jon Phalen / November 22nd, 2003
the history of deception to lure reluctant US citizens to support wars.
Explores the evidence for Remote Control software in the 9/11 hijackings (not too dissimilar from electronic hijacking of our computerized election ballot machines).
A scandal in England and Ireland about a terrorist called "stakeknife" concerned a thug for the IRA who was actually a British double agent (in other words, the Brits ran one of the most ruthless IRA killers in order to legitimize their occupation of northern Ireland).
The "false flag" operations by the Italian fascists in Italy are well documented by many - one of the most notorious was the bombing of the Bologna train station in 1980, perpetrated by the fascists (with official ties) to blame on the "left" to create the climate for a right wing military coup. The article below has crucial information about the "P2," Operation Gladio and the Vatican Bank - a story with disturbing parallels to the current situation in the United States.
9/11 IN CONTEXT: PLANS AND COUNTERPLANS
by Max Kolskegg
It is time to have a hard, clear-eyed look at our situation here in this post-September 11 "brave new world order", on the brink of a huge conflagration in the Middle East, with endless war beyond. The Global Fascist Terror State has arrived, the fruit of decades of planning, propaganda and provocation. September 11 was its coming-out party, and for us, the last wake-up call. So now let's face the facts. No more self-delusion, no more easy roads. The reality is plain as day, and so therefore is our task.
Making a Case for 9/11 Skepticism
by John A. McCurdy
www.globalresearch.ca 20 November 2003
The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MCC311A.html
The Bush 9/11 Scandal for Dummies by Bernard Weiner June 1, 2002
A very good introductory article that points out the likelihood that Bush's notorious month-long "vacation" at his so-called ranch near Crawford, Texas was probably a long planning meeting for the post-9/11 political environment.
www.narconews.com/goff1.html "The So-Called Evidence Is a Farce" By Stan Goff
written shortly after 9/11, this is still one of the best articles explaining the political context and the phony evidence for the official story
www.attackonamerica.net/ignorad.htm -- MSNBC article on the standdown by a (now deceased) mainstream journalist
Sander Hicks interviews John Judge
why is there no investigation of what happened?
If I had to choose just four links to show your average joe and jane, and pique their interest in the possibility of a 9/11 coverup, these would be my top picks right now:
1. The wargames acknowledgement AP report. The SF Chronicle is the only paper I know of that still has the original AP report available in their archives.
2. Senator Dayton's declaration that NORAD and the FAA lied. He announced it during the week of the Dem's National Convention last year. He's got a pair.
3. This in depth timeline of the event of that day certainly points toward high-level government deception. It's long, but fascinating and crucial to understanding just what Senator Dayton was talking about.
4. And then finally This gem of a report on the destruction of the FAA controller tapes. No coverup is complete without the destruction of evidence :-)
I think the best way to wake up more of the public is to let them see with their own eyes the evidence that the 9/11 truth movement has been pointing to all along, and the more official the source, the better. I guess that's why I like the FAA/NORAD lying angle for leading people into the seemy underworld of 9/11. It's one of the aspects of the whole event that's fairly well documented in the mainstream press, giving us the opportunity to point this stuff out without referring to news sources considered illegitimate by a public that still can't imagine the media would or even could tell such Big Lies.
www.osamaskidneys.com [no longer on-line]
What is the true story of the Sept. 11 attacks?
We do not know, because it is shrouded in secrecy. But thousands of 9/11 Skeptics on the Internet have used evidence from the mainstream and foreign press to demonstrate beyond doubt that the official story is incomplete, inconsistent and rife with lies. In March and April 2002, Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney (D-GA) became the first American politician on the federal level to question the official story and suggest that elements of the U.S. government may have known of the attacks in advance. On May 16 , the White House was forced to admit receiving warnings, in the months before Sept. 11, of a Qaeda plot to hijack airliners in the United States. This admission was coupled with the claim that no one in the administration could have guessed that these planes would be used in suicide attacks - a demonstrable falsehood. Since then, many revelations from government agencies have corroborated the 9/11 Skeptics' claims that pre-Sept. 11 investigations by the FBI, which might have prevented the attacks, were obstructed from within the government. The government also confirmed that the war in Afghanistan was prepared in advance of Sept. 11, and that a finished plan for the war was presented to George W. Bush two days before the attacks on New York and Washington. By then, large British and American forces had already arrived or were underway to the Central Asian theater. In an effort at damage control, the revelations of the past month have been limited. Congressional investigators and the mainstream U.S. media have made little effort to connect the dots logically, which would yield an even more troubling picture of the government's actions at the highest levels. Attention has focused instead on middle-level "failures" of bureaucracy and analysis, with an accompanying campaign to justify more radical surveillance and police measures and the creation of a new Homeland Security Department. But the revelations have served to support many of the cardinal assertions of the oft-maligned 9/11 Skeptics movement. On June 10 , C-SPAN refused to broadcast a major press conference in Washington organized by former government officials, relatives of 9/11 victims and investigative journalists, who posed vital "Unanswered Questions" about the attacks and their true background. This setback was predictable; the issue is still too controversial for the mainstream media. 9/11 Skeptics should not therefore despair. The time has come for skeptics to unite, to speak openly, to stay loud and proud, and to employ creative, determined and peaceful means with heart and humor, to force disclosure of the full story of the Sept. 11 attacks. History is with us!