Friday, May 30, 2008

Corr brother says 9/11 ’an inside job’

CORRS guitarist Jim Corr has claimed that there was overwhelming evidence that the 9/11 attacks in America were carried out by "rogue elements" of US President George Bush's "neo-con administration".

In a rare intervention into the political arena, the male singer with The Corrs band came out against the Lisbon Treaty claiming that it is "tip-toe totalitarianism in the West".

In an interview with Matt Cooper on Today FM's 'Last Word', Corr made the case for voting 'No' to Lisbon, claiming it could introduce the death penalty to Ireland and contribute to a "new world order".

Corr's opposition is based on his three years "studying the New World Order which the European Union is a part of".

He said "the EU is a stepping stone towards a world government, they will merge it with the Asia Pacific Union, the African Union and the North American Union". The Lisbon Treaty itself will introduce "a scientific technocracy" to Europe which will erode national sovereignty.

Corr claimed that The Charter of Fundamental Rights allows for the introduction of the death penalty.

"It makes provision for the introduction to law for the death penalty in times of war or imminent threat of war.

"What we are seeing is tip-toe totalitarianism in the West with 9/11 the key to understanding this.

"When you study 9/11 it becomes very apparent... it was a staged terrorist attack, what they call a false flag operation."

Corr said overwhelming evidence suggests 9/11 "was carried out by rogue elements in the Bush neo-con administration".


9/11: Cover For A Coup D’Etat?

The following text was extracted from a lengthy OpEdNews article, written by a Ed Encho, on May 27, 2008.

"With any crime it is imperative to look at who benefited or Cui Bono for those familiar with Latin and there have been many beneficiaries of 9/11, first and foremost there is the by now infamous Project For The New American Century, a policy organization for global/full spectrum U.S. military dominance whose members and contributors are a who's who of fifth columnist fascist filth including none other than Richard B. Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld. The PNAC's reference to the need for a "New Pearl Harbor" to allow for their plans to be implemented should have been ample circumstantial evidence for major players to be subpoenaed and put under oath in front of the Kean-Hamilton Commission but any questioning of this most blatantly arrogant statement was as absent from the report as the collapse of WTC 7 or what Sibel Edmonds may have stumbled upon while translating communications while she was employed by the FBI."


"A while back I found a piece of information that really gave credence to my strongest suspicions that the 'terrorist' attacks of 9/11/01 were used as cover for an actual coup d'etat by a rogue network of fifth columnists and their multi-national foreign allies who then utilized the (C.O.G) Continuity Of Government infrastructure to effectively seize control of the United States which would effectively render the actual attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon as not even the greatest crimes of that particular day. I discovered this piece on Edward Luttwak while plowing through the massive tome Neo-Conned! Again: Hypocrisy, Lawlessness, and the Rape of Iraq which is the second volume of a great collection of essays on the neoconservative pox on America that run the ideological gamut from Pat Buchanan to Noam Chomsky but all are consistently antiwar. The particular piece that I refer to is one that was written by Italian journalist Maurizio Blondet on neocon Edward Luttwak that references his seminal 1968 book < EM>. In the essay (a postscript to Chapter 3) Blondet draws comparisons to the Luttwak blueprint and the ascension of the neocons by using 9/11 as a basis for their rise to power.]"


"So who really runs America? The elected government or a parallel/shadow government that has existed in some shape or form essentially since the end of WW II? The evidence is beginning to strongly support the latter. Most importantly and absolutely essential to the successful execution of a hostile takeover is the secret/shadow government apparatus itself. Author Peter Dale Scott recently alluded to the execution of the C.O.G. plans that subvert the Constitution (originally implemented during the Cold War in the event of a Soviet decapitation strike) in both this easy to read Counterpunch article and in much more depth in his outstanding new book on the "Deep State" entitled: The Road to 9/11: Wealth, Empire and the Future of America. It is naive and childlike for thinking Americans to ignore the deep politics that represent the true power base in this and other countries for it not only exists but thrives in darkness and through it's existence makes the ability to subvert the traditional processes possible."


"The evidence strongly suggests that a rogue faction has seized control since 9/11 and may have even in some way been complicit in allowing the attacks to occur. There are just too many little inconsistencies, procedural changes (NORAD intercepts), multiple war games on 9/11 including simulated hijacks, a war game called Global Guardian that happened to utilize the same B4B Doomsday Planes that were used for C.O.G., the knowledge of the alleged hijackers by the government in Able Danger, the immediate information available to the news media on the 'hijackers' (could be that they were being tracked and monitored but for what exact purpose?) those mysterious Israeli art students who were thrown out of the country (why were they here? To prevent the attacks or ensure that the plan was going accordingly), the immediate availability of the USA PATRIOT Act to implement the police state, the unsolved military grade Anthrax attacks that only were targeted against influential Democrats and news anchors and the list goes on much longer than I can list here although I do want to mention the possibility that 9/11 may have been aided and abetted by the same nuclear blackmail ring that Sibel Edmonds spoke of in those three stories in the London Times earlier in 2008 (For Sale, West's Deadly Nuclear Secrets , FBI Denies File Exposing Neclear Secrets Theft and Tip Off Thwarted Nuclear Spy Ring Probe) and while this is purely speculative may be connected to security of breaches in association to 9/11 as well as raises questions as to exactly who the recently suicided D.C. Madame Deborah Jeane Palfrey may have had on her client list and what they were being used for . It all adds up though to JFK's "monolithic and ruthless conspiracy" and the neocons are as guilty as hell in all of it and especially those with ties to a traitor named Richard B. Cheney who did after all select himself as Vice President and then proceed to consolidate power in his office."


"Stealing the 2000 election was essential, the neocons needed a useful idiot in George W. Bush to piggyback into the White House where Cheney and Rumsfeld could set up their shops in order to allow for the coup to be executed. Once Bush's installation was ensured by the requisite political chicanery, black ops, a massive psyops media campaign and the assistance of the Federalist Society stooges on the Supreme Court all the pieces were in place. A weak and easily manipulated president who appealed to a certain segment of the population, a self-selected V.P., the necessary bureaucratic appointments and the stage was set for the catalyzing event that would set the plan into motion and the ensuing quashing of dissent when the power grab came. I wonder why any serious investigation of those nasty little anthrax letters has never taken place, and why the only recipients were influential media figures and key Democrats who could have potentially stopped the USA PATRIOT Act."

Read Complete Entry


Spooks Promise Terror Attack For New President

Both Clinton and Bush exploited bombings within first year of taking office, Obama or McCain likely to enjoy the same opportunity

National intelligence spooks are all but promising that history will be repeated for a third time running, and the new President of the United States - likely Barack Obama or John McCain - will be welcomed into office by a terror attack that will occur within the first year of his tenure.

"When the next president takes office in January, he or she will likely receive an intelligence brief warning that Islamic terrorists will attempt to exploit the transition in power by planning an attack on America, intelligence experts say," according to a report in the Washington Times.

"Islamic terrorists bombed the World Trade Center in February 1993, in Mr. Clinton's second month as president. Al Qaeda's Sept. 11 attacks came in the Bush presidency's first year….The pattern is clear to some national security experts. Terrorists pay particular attention to a government in transition as the most opportune window to launch an attack."

Naturally, the Washington Times article makes out as if a terror attack within the early stages of a new presidency is a bad thing, but both Clinton and Bush exploited terror in America to realize preconceived domestic and geopolitical agendas.

The 1993 World Trade Center bombing was an inside job from start to finish - it did not come as a "surprise" to the U.S. government since they ran the entire operation, having cooked the bomb for the "Islamic terrorists" that they had groomed for the attack.

In 1993 the FBI planted their informant, Emad A. Salem, within a radical Arab group in New York led by Ramzi Yousef. Salem was ordered to encourage the group to carry out a bombing targeting the World Trade Center's twin towers. Under the illusion that the project was a sting operation, Salem asked the FBI for harmless dummy explosives which he would use to assemble the bomb and then pass on to the group. At this point the FBI cut Salem out of the loop and provided the group with real explosives, leading to the attack on February 26 that killed six and injured over a thousand people. The FBI's failure to prevent the bombing was reported on by the New York Times in October 1993.


The attack, coupled with the Oklahoma City bombing less than two years later, enabled Bill Clinton to whip up support for the passage of a plethora of unconstitutional legislation, including the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, the Brady Bill, the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, and a $100 million dollar grant to Israel for "counter-terrorism" purposes.

By the time Clinton left office, the Patriot movement - which before the OKC bombing had grown in leaps and bounds, spurred on by the atrocities committed by the federal government at Waco - was effectively dead.

Few need reminding of George W. Bush's agenda before he took office. The ideological framework that would shape his presidency - encapsulated by the goals of the Neo-Con Project For a New American Century - required a "new Pearl Harbor" to get things started, which is exactly what they received on September 11, 2001.

Furthermore, the attacks enabled Bush to pursue an invasion of Iraq that he had dreamed of achieving as early as 1999, according to the ghostwriter of Bush's autobiography Mickey Herskowitz.

"One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief. My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it. If I have a chance to invade—if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it. I'm going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I'm going to have a successful presidency," Bush told Herskowitz.

That "chance to invade" arrived on the morning of 9/11, within hours of which Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, "Was telling his aides to come up with plans for striking Iraq — even though there was no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the attacks."

A Congressional Research Service report last month stated, "Whether an incident of national security significance occurs just before or soon after the presidential transition, the actions or inactions of the outgoing administration may have a long-lasting effect on the new president's ability to effectively safeguard U.S. interests and may affect the legacy of the outgoing president."

The government seems pretty certain that McCain or Obama will be presented with a terror attack early on in their presidency and is giving them ample time to prepare the best method of exploiting it, but only to "safeguard U.S. interests," naturally.

The pattern is clear - each time a new President takes office they have a mandate to act as a torch bearer for the same agenda - domestic repression and foreign invasion. A terror attack provides the perfect pretext to realize those goals.

Whether it be Barack Obama or John McCain, we can expect a new crisis to conveniently arrive shortly after they take office, enabling them to pursue the same tyrannical blueprint followed by their predecessors.


Prominent Structural Engineers Say:

Official Version of 9/11 "Impossible" "Defies Common Logic" "Violates the Law of Physics"

Numerous structural engineers now publicly challenge the government's account of the destruction of the Trade Centers on 9/11, including:

A prominent engineer with 55 years experience, in charge of the design of hundreds of major building projects including high rise offices, former member of the California Seismic Safety Commission and former member of the National Institute of Sciences Building Safety Council (Marx Ayres) believes that the World Trade Centers were brought down by controlled demolition (see also this)

Two professors of structural engineering at a prestigious Swiss university (Dr. Joerg Schneider and Dr. Hugo Bachmann) said that, on 9/11, World Trade Center 7 was brought down by controlled demolition (translation here)

Kamal S. Obeid, structural engineer, with a masters degree in Engineering from UC Berkeley, of Fremont, California, says:

"Photos of the steel, evidence about how the buildings collapsed, the unexplainable collapse of WTC 7, evidence of thermite in the debris as well as several other red flags, are quite troubling indications of well planned and controlled demolition"

Ronald H. Brookman, structural engineer, with a masters degree in Engineering from UC Davis, of Novato California, writes:

"Why would all 110 stories drop straight down to the ground in about 10 seconds, pulverizing the contents into dust and ash - twice. Why would all 47 stories of WTC 7 fall straight down to the ground in about seven seconds the same day? It was not struck by any aircraft or engulfed in any fire. An independent investigation is justified for all three collapses including the surviving steel samples and the composition of the dust."
Graham John Inman, structural engineer, of London, England, points out:

"WTC 7 Building could not have collapsed as a result of internal fire and external debris. NO plane hit this building. This is the only case of a steel frame building collapsing through fire in the world. The fire on this building was small & localized therefore what is the cause?"
Paul W. Mason, structural engineer, of Melbourne, Australia, argues:

"In my view, the chances of the three buildings collapsing symmetrically into their own footprint, at freefall speed, by any other means than by controlled demolition, are so remote that there is no other plausible explanation!"
Mills M. Kay Mackey, structural engineer, of Denver, Colorado, points out:

"The force from the jets and the burning fuel could not have been sufficient to make the building collapse. Why doesn't the media mention that the 11th floor was completely immolated on February 13th, 1975? It had the weight of nearly 100 stories on top of it but it did not collapse?"
David Scott, Structural Engineer, of Scotland, argues:

"Near-freefall collapse violates laws of physics. Fire induced collapse is not consistent with observed collapse mode . . . ."
Nathan Lomba, Structural Engineer, of Eureka, California, states

"I began having doubts about, so called, official explanations for the collapse of the WTC towers soon after the explanations surfaced. The gnawing question that lingers in my mind is: How did the structures collapse in near symmetrical fashion when the apparent precipitating causes were asymmetrical loading? The collapses defies common logic from an elementary structural engineering perspective. "If" you accept the argument that fire protection covering was damaged to such an extent that structural members in the vicinity of the aircraft impacts were exposed to abnormally high temperatures, and "if" you accept the argument that the temperatures were high enough to weaken the structural framing, that still does not explain the relatively concentric nature of the failures.

Neither of the official precipitating sources for the collapses, namely the burning aircraft, were centered within the floor plan of either tower; both aircraft were off-center when they finally came to rest within the respective buildings. This means that, given the foregoing assumptions, heating and weakening of the structural framing would have been constrained to the immediate vicinity of the burning aircraft. Heat transmission (diffusion) through the steel members would have been irregular owing to differing sizes of the individual members; and, the temperature in the members would have dropped off precipitously the further away the steel was from the flames—just as the handle on a frying pan doesn't get hot at the same rate as the pan on the burner of the stove. These factors would have resulted in the structural framing furthest from the flames remaining intact and possessing its full structural integrity, i.e., strength and stiffness.

Structural steel is highly ductile, when subjected to compression and bending it buckles and bends long before reaching its tensile or shear capacity. Under the given assumptions, "if" the structure in the vicinity of either burning aircraft started to weaken, the superstructure above would begin to lean in the direction of the burning side. The opposite, intact, side of the building would resist toppling until the ultimate capacity of the structure was reached, at which point, a weak-link failure would undoubtedly occur. Nevertheless, the ultimate failure mode would have been a toppling of the upper floors to one side—much like the topping of a tall redwood tree—not a concentric, vertical collapse.

For this reason alone, I rejected the official explanation for the collapse of the WTC towers out of hand. Subsequent evidence supporting controlled, explosive demolition of the two buildings are more in keeping with the observed collapse modalities and only serve to validate my initial misgivings as to the causes for the structural failures."
Edward E. Knesl, civil and structural engineer, of Phoenix, Arizona, writes:

"We design and analyze buildings for the overturning stability to resist the lateral loads with the combination of the gravity loads. Any tall structure failure mode would be a fall over to its side. It is impossible that heavy steel columns could collapse at the fraction of the second within each story and subsequently at each floor below.

We do not know the phenomenon of the high rise building to disintegrate internally faster than the free fall of the debris coming down from the top.

The engineering science and the law of physics simply doesn't know such possibility. Only very sophisticated controlled demolition can achieve such result, eliminating the natural dampening effect of the structural framing huge mass that should normally stop the partial collapse. The pancake theory is a fallacy, telling us that more and more energy would be generated to accelerate the collapse. Where would such energy would be coming from ?"

David Topete, civil and structural engineer, San Francisco, California

Charles Pegelow, structural engineer, of Houston, Texas (and see this)

Dennis Kollar, structural engineer, of West Bend, Wisconsin

Doyle Winterton, structural engineer (retired)

Michael T. Donly, P.E., structural engineer

William Rice, P.E., structural engineer, former professor of Vermont Technical College

See this website and this website for further additions.

There are many other structural engineers who have questioned the government's account in private. We support them and wish them courage to discuss these vital issues publicly.

See also this.


Thursday, May 22, 2008

Government Insider: Bush Authorized 911 Attacks

Keep in mind when reading this, that the man being interviewed is no two-bit internet conspiracy buff.

Stanley Hilton was a senior advisor to Sen Bob Dole (R) and has personally known Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz for decades. This courageous man has risked his professional reputation, and possibly his life, to get this information out to people.

The following is from his latest visit to Alex Jones' radio show.

Note: All honor to Stanley Hilton for risking his life so that we may know the truth of 9/11.

The Bush Junta Unmasked

"This (9/11) was all planned. This was a government-ordered operation. Bush personally signed the order. He personally authorized the attacks. He is guilty of treason and mass murder." –Stanley Hilton

Continue to complete interview


Tuesday, May 20, 2008

Pentagon 9/11 Flight ’Black Box’ Data File Created Before Actual ’Black Box’ Was Recovered?

A flight data file created by the downloaded Flight Data Recorder information of American Airlines flight 77 was created on Thursday, September 13, 2001 at 11:45pm.


However, as reported by USA Today, Pentagon spokesman Army Lt. Col. George Rhynedance reported that the FDR for AA 77 was recovered on Friday, September 14, 2001 at 4am, 4 hours and 15 minutes after the creation of the AA 77 FDR data file.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Searchers on Friday found the flight data and cockpit voice recorders from the hijacked plane that flew into the Pentagon and exploded, Department of Defense officials said. The two "black boxes," crucial to uncovering details about the doomed flight's last moments, were recovered at about 4 a.m., said Army Lt. Col. George Rhynedance, a Pentagon spokesman.

The AA 77 FDR file was contained within a May 2008 release obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request of the National Transportation Safety Board.


Steven Jones Calls for 9/11 Criminal Investigations

By peakdavid
05/17/2008 09:39:20 PM EST

Based on evidence of what he believes is unignited thermite particles in debris collected within minutes after the collapse of the World Trade Center's first tower, retired BYU physicist Steven Jones called for a criminal investigation into the destruction of three World Trade Center high rises in a speech at a 9/11 conference in Boston. Public video of his presentation at the Decemeber 15, 2007 event was recently released and can be seen here:

In the first of a series of videos to be released from the Second Annual Boston Tea Party & Conference for 9/11 Truth, Dr. Steven Jones made public for the first time the results of his tests on "red chips" found in dust collected within minutes of the total collapse of the first two World Trade Center Towers.

In his presentation, "9/11 Research: High Temperatures, Iron-Rich Spheres, and Another Discovery," Jones discussed the history and chain of custody of three samples of dust, the last being collected from the pedestrian rail of Brooklyn Bridge by university student Frank Delessio as he was fleeing the area approximately 10 minutes after the collapse of the North Tower.

Jones' electron microscopy study of what he calls an "uncontaminated dust sample" revealed the presence of red chips in the dust. An XEDS spectrum analysis showed one side of the chips to contain the chemical signature of Thermite, which can produce short bursts of high temperatures and is used in welding and cutting steel.

Results of Jones' tests have been replicated by other scientists, and Jones has sent samples to independent labs for further confirmation. If the presence of the incendiary thermite is confirmed, Jones said, it would be strong grounds for opening a full-scale "criminal investigation."

Jones is founding editor of the Journal of 9/11 Studies, a peer-reviewed academic journal dedicated to scientific examination of the events of 9/11. He also recently authored the first article on 9/11 to be published in a peer-reviewed civil engineering journal, The Open Civil Engineering Journal (TOCEJ). The article is entitled "Fourteen Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the World Trade Center Destruction" (18 April 2008).

Forthcoming videos from conference presenters will include Joel S. Hirshhorn, Ph.D., a metallurgical engineering professor and former senior staff member of the Congressional Office of Technology; Richard Gage, AIA, and found of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth; and Barbara Honegger, military analyst, former aide to President Reagan and author of the recent "The Pentagon Attack Papers"


Saturday, May 17, 2008

Rumsfeld On Tape: Terror Attack Could Restore Neo-Con Agenda

Former Defense Secretary's conversation with military analysts on political problems - "The Correction For That...Is An Attack"

Shocking excerpts of confidential recordings recently released under the Freedom of Information Act feature former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld talking with top military analysts about how a flagging Neo-Con political agenda could be successfully restored with the aid of another terrorist attack on America.

The tape also includes a conversation where Rumsfeld and the military analysts agree on the possible necessity of installing a brutal dictator in Iraq to oversee U.S. interests.

The tapes were released as part of the investigation into the Pentagon's "message force multipliers" program in which top military analysts were hired to propagandize for the Iraq war in the corporate media.

In attendance at the valedictory luncheon Rumsfeld hosted on December 12, 2006 were David L. Grange, Donald W. Sheppard, James Marks, Rick Francona, Wayne Downing, and Robert H. Scales, Jr. among others.

The most extraordinary exchange takes place when Lt. Gen. Michael DeLong bemoans shrinking political support for Neo-Con war plans on Capitol Hill and suggests that sympathy for the Bush administration's agenda will only be achieved after a new terror attack.

Rumsfeld agrees that the psychological impact of 9/11 is wearing off and the "behavior pattern" of citizens in both the U.S. and Europe suggests that they are unconcerned about the threat of terror.

DELONG: Politically, what are the challenges because you're not going to have a lot of sympathetic ears up there until it [a terror attack] happens.

RUMSFELD: That's what I was just going to say. This President's pretty much a victim of success. We haven't had an attack in five years. The perception of the threat is so low in this society that it's not surprising that the behavior pattern reflects a low threat assessment. The same thing's in Europe, there's a low threat perception. The correction for that, I suppose, is an attack. And when that happens, then everyone gets energized for another [inaudible] and it's a shame we don't have the maturity to recognize the seriousness of the threats...the lethality, the carnage, that can be imposed on our society is so real and so present and so serious that you'd think we'd be able to understand it, but as a society, the longer you get away from 9/11, the less...the less...

Click here for the audio clip.

In another exchange, after assuring that comments are "off the record," Rumsfeld and one of the military analysts agree that Iraq could use a "Syngman Rhee" to take control of Iraq. Syngman Rhee was the ruthless authoritarian dictator of South Korea from after World War II through the Korean War to 1960. If the invasion of Iraq was about liberating the Iraqis from a tyrant in the form of Saddam Hussein why is Rumsfeld talking about installing an even more brutal dictator?

Click here for the audio clip. Newsvine has the recording in full.

Rumsfeld's admission that the correction for dwindling support of the Neo-Con imperial crusade is another terror attack is perhaps the most startling and blatant indication that 9/11 was an inside job.

How much more evidence do we need to confirm that the Neo-Con hierarchy in control of the U.S. government are instigating and exploiting terror in the pursuit of their own domestic and geopolitical agenda?

As Jerry Mazza writes today, "In the seven years since the day, exhaustive and still growing evidence proves beyond any reasonable doubt that the US government, spearheaded by the Bush administration, planned, orchestrated and executed the 9/11 false flag operation. As openly advocated by wide swaths of elites, from the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), of which Rumsfeld has been a member, to the likes of Zbigniew Brzezinski (in his The Grand Chessboard), only an attack "on the order of Pearl Harbor" would, in Brzezinski's words, cause the American people to support an "imperial mobilization," and a world war."

Placing the new evidence against previously revealed 9/11-related acts on the part of Rumsfeld, his guilt is overt and obvious. Recall that it was Rumsfeld who enthusiastically penned the "Go Massive" memo, gleefully declaring the Bush administration finally had the green light to kill: "Not only UBL (Usama bin Laden). Go massive. Sweep it all up. Things related and not."

The longing for a new terror attack to corral the masses back behind the Neo-Con agenda is a shared fetish amongst Neo-Cons, policy wonks and academics alike.

In August last year Philadelphia Daily News columnist Stu Bykofsky openly called for "another 9/11" that "would help America" restore a "community of outrage and national resolve".

Lt.-Col. Doug Delaney, chair of the war studies program at the Royal Military College in Kingston, Ontario, told the Toronto Star last July that "The key to bolstering Western resolve is another terrorist attack like 9/11 or the London transit bombings of two years ago."

The same sentiment was also explicitly expressed in a 2005 GOP memo, which yearned for new attacks that would "validate" the President's war on terror and "restore his image as a leader of the American people."

Also in July 2007, former Republican Senator Rick Santorum suggested that a series of "unfortunate events," namely terrorist attacks, will occur within the next year and change American citizen's perception of the war.

And the month before that, the new chairman of the Arkansas Republican Party Dennis Milligan said that there needed to be more attacks on American soil for President Bush to regain popular approval.

Comments posted on the left-wing Huffington Post website in response to the Rumsfeld tape indicate that even some of the most hardcore conspiracy debunkers have had their beliefs shaken to the core by the former Defense Secretary's admission.

"I have been a very staunch opponent of conspiracy theories," writes one, "but to hear the man most responsible for stopping foreign threats to American lives musing that a successful attack on the USA is somehow a "cure" for us... it almost makes me want to make a tinfoil hat with the nuts I made fun of."


The Trouble with WTC Asbestos

David Rockefeller and his brother, Nelson, originally conceived the twin towers as an urban renewal project to revitalize Lower Manhattan. In 1966, 164 buildings, including many electonics stores in seedy radio row, were demolished to create the WTC construction site.

But, with the realization of the Rockefellers' urban renewal dream came a nightmare: by the time the first tenants moved into the North Tower in December 1970, the World Trade Center was rife with asbestos…asbestos that 31 years later covered all of Lower Manhattan.

Exactly How Much Asbestos Did the WTC Contain?

Twin Tower Asbestos

Nobody seems to know exactly how much asbestos was in the WTC, but click on the image to the right and you'll get a pretty good idea: a lot!

The New York Port Authority originally planned to use 5,000 tons of asbestos fireproofing. The fireproofing, trademarked Blade-Shield, was manufactured by United States Mineral Products of Stanhope, N.J. It was 20% asbestos mixed with mineral wool — a concrete-like substance made from melted rock.

By 1971, medical studies began to show the cancerous effects of asbestos, and New York City banned its use in construction — but not before asbestos-containing Blade-Shield was sprayed on the beams and supports of the first 40 floors of the Twin Towers.

The Port Authority claims that over half of the applied asbestos-containing fireproofing had been removed by September 11, 2001.

So, how much asbestos remained in the Twin Towers?

Estimates vary from 400 tons all the way up to 2000 tons.

Getting Rid of 400 Tons of Asbestos

By the 1990s, the twenty-year-old Twin Towers — like any other twenty-year-old office buildings — were due for some major upgrades.

Writes John Perkins in Confessions of an Economic Hit Man:

…in recent years the complex…had the reputation of being A financial misfit, unsuited to modern fiber-optic and Internet technologies, and burdened with an inefficient and costly elevator system.

Unfortunately, due to the danger of spreading asbestos dust, building codes required any remodeling work be preceded by removing the asbestos.

So, in 1991, with two gigantic out-of-date office buildings on its hands, the Port Authority tried to garner the immense funds required to remove the asbestos: it filed suit against its insurers. The case, Port Authority of NY vs. Affiliated FM Insurance Co., sought between 500 million and 1 billion dollars for asbestos abatement.

The case dragged on for years, and then finally, on May 14, 2001, the judge ruled against the Port Authority; there would be no insurance money for asbestos removal.

Because of the asbestos health risks, and their size, the Twin Towers couldn't be demolished. And because of the asbestos, they couldn't be upgraded. And disassembling them floor by floor would have run into the double-digit billions of dollars.

So, that's how, by May 2001, the Port Authority found itself between several rocks and the hard bedrock 70 feet beneath the WTC.

The Bright Catastrophe at the End of the Tunnel

Lucky for the Port Authority, a gullible guy named Larry Silverstein showed up (actually, Silverstein was no stranger to the Port Authority — he'd developed and constructed Building 7 on the WTC site), and he wanted to lease the out-of-date no-future Twin Tower money pits. On July 24, 2001, Silverstein purchased the lease for 99 years in a deal worth over $3.2 billion. He then took out insurance policies that covered terrorist attacks. Just seven weeks later, we're told the terrorists did indeed attack. That's what we're told…but one can never be sure of a story worth $3.2 billion.

To date, Silverstein has received almost $5 billion from nine different insurance companies.

Meanwhile, mesotheliomasos, a rare lung cancer, has already begun to kill some of the hundreds of thousands of Manhattan residents and 9/11 first responders. Doctors and scientists agree that an increasing number of cases will appear due to the tons of WTC asbestos that rained down on Manhattan.


State Says Hundreds Of 9/11 Rescue Workers Now Dead, Admits Undercount

First responders' representitive:"It's the tip of the iceberg"

New York State health officials have released statistics indicating that 360 9/11 rescue workers have since died, but have also admitted that there is an overall undercount.

The New York Daily News reports that of those deaths 154 have been explained and 80 have died of various forms of cancer, mostly impacting the lungs and digestive system while others were related to blood cancers and heart and circulatory diseases.

"It's the tip of the iceberg," said David Worby, who is representing 10,000 workers - 600 with cancer - who say they got sick after working on rescue and recovery efforts.

"These statistics bear out how toxic that site was," Worby said.

The Statistics were released by the World Trade Center Responder Fatality Investigation Program.

While insisting the state is "not making judgment" on whether all the deaths were related to the toxic air around ground zero, which was filled with asbestos, mercury, lead and other contaminants, official Kitty Gelberg did say that she believes there to be an overall undercount of rescuers and workers who have died since 9/11.

In spite of the state's refusal to be drawn on whether there has been an elevation in deaths due to 9/11, it was revealed back In 2006, almost five years on from the disaster, that there has been a startling increase in cases of a particular lung scarring disease, known as sarcoidosis, among firefighters, which rose to five times the expected rate in the two years after the attacks.

At the time the New York Times reported:

"The most worrisome to medical experts are granulomatous pulmonary diseases, which show a particular type of swirling marks left on the lungs by foreign matter like dust. Doctors say the severity of the disease is often dictated by a patient's genetic makeup. The diseases include pulmonary fibrosis and sarcoidosis, a sometimes fatal disorder that can be set off when exposure to dust causes the body's immune system to attack itself. "

Medical experts have stated that it still may be at least another decade before the full effects of the attacks are witnessed as diseases may take longer to develop in some people than others. It is estimated that around 40,000 people were involved in rescue work around the World Trade Center site and the Fresh Kills landfill where debris was taken immediately following the attacks.

The number effected may be significantly more than that however given that a recent study by Mount Sinai Medical Center revealed that out of 70,000 participants, 85 percent are suffering some kind of respiratory problem.

A previous study in 2006 by the medical center also found that of of 9,442 workers, 70% suffer breathing problems. This was also the figure gleened from a further study in 2007.

Though the center's figures have been criticized and questioned by some, they are the only real source to go on given that the city, state and federal governments did not engage in any form of research into or treatment of 9/11 related illnesses for some time after the attacks, and still have not set about a truly committed program to do so.

Dr. Robin Herbert, Co-director of the World Trade Center Medical Monitoring Program at Mount Sinai has indicated that there may be three "waves" of illnesses experienced by ground zero workers. The first wave refers to coughing and respiratory problems, the second wave includes severe chronic lung diseases and the third wave could be fatal cancers.

Dr. Michael Baden, chief forensic pathologist for the New York State Police and the former chief medical examiner of New York City, has reviewed several ground zero-related autopsies, and has commented "Three thousand people may have died, but 100,000 others may have been exposed".

We have extensively reported on the fact that the EPA knowingly gave misleading information to residents and workers regarding the air quality in the aftermath of the attacks and how a cover up, which leads to officials at the very top, has ensued.

The heroes of 9/11 have been shunned by a government that still refuses cover the costs of healthcare for the vast majority of the stricken because to do so would be an admission of culpability.

Last month it was reported that some of the heroes who have since succumbed to dust-related illnesses will be memorialized on the NYPD's "Wall of Heroes" for officers killed in the line of duty.

Sadly, more space will be needed on that wall in the months and years to come as the officials ultimately responsible for this continuing tragedy remain unpunished.


Government Apologists Keep Moving the Goal Posts

The people defending the government's version of 9/11 have continuously moved the goal posts:

• Initially, the government apologists pretended that everyone believed the "official story" of 9/11

• Then, when the family members of the victims and everyday Americans started to publicly question the government's story, they said "but, all of the experts confirm the government"

• Then, when hundreds of top experts in relevant fields - military officials, intelligence officers, physicists, chemists, mathematicians, air traffic controllers, etc. - publicly questioned the government's story, they said "well, no structural engineers question 9/11"

• Then, when numerous structural engineers decided to risk their careers to question the official version of events, they said "yeah, but no criticism of the government's claims has been published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal"

• Then, when papers began to be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, they scrambled with new arguments . . .

They keep moving the goal posts, which is a sign of dishonesty. Its the old bait-and-switch … come up with one argument, and when it is shot down as false, make up a new one.

Indeed, if Bush, Cheney, and Rummie all confessed under oath that they carried out 9/11, the defenders of the official version would probably try to move the goal posts yet again

"true, but no one checked to see if they had their fingers crossed behind their backs at the time.

And they've been under alot of stress recently. Maybe they've suffered from short-term memory loss.

And you don't have any video actually showing them ordering the stand down, do you?! Why should we believe you if you don't have video of them doing it?!"

If you have questioned 9/11 for a couple of years, you'll know that the above-described history of goalpost-moving is accurate. If you haven't, google around and you'll probably see what I mean.


Tuesday, May 6, 2008

Karen S. Johnson: Backing my claims about 9/11 questions

A recent letter to the editor asked for evidence of my claims regarding the tragedy of 9/11. Below I present some points that are presently known. I won't be able to convince anyone who doesn't want to be convinced, but for those who are willing to deal with factual evidence, consider the following:

• 37 different people reported explosions in the basement of the World Trade Center Towers before the first plane hit, and seismic equipment recorded both the explosions and the impacts. In addition, people were injured by the explosions in the basement, providing well-documented evidence. Yet this evidence is ignored.

•The media and government have promoted the "pancake theory" as the cause of the collapse of the Twin Towers — that is, fire weakened the steel support beams, causing the upper floors to collapse. Then the weight of the collapsing floors above caused the floors below to collapse. This theory is not consistent with scientific principles or the facts. Frank Legge, who has a doctorate in chemistry, and Tony Szamboti, a mechanical engineer, reported in December in the Journal of 9/11 Studies: "It appears therefore that the official concept of a free-fall collapse of the upper portion through the initiation story, due to heat effects from fire, is a fantasy. If the temperature did become high enough for collapse to occur" — and everyone agrees that it did not — "it could not have happened in the observed manner. In particular it could not have been sudden and thus could not have produced the velocity, and hence the momentum and kinetic energy, upon which the official story depends for the second stage of collapse."

• The theory that the buildings collapsed due to controlled-demolition explosives, however, is consistent with scientific principles and the facts. The "demolition" theory, in fact, is the only one which scientists have been able to corroborate. That is, "… all observations are in accord with the use of explosives in a time sequence." (Legge and Szamboti, December, Journal of 9/11 Studies.)

• Peer-reviewed reports indicate that the masses of dust particles created by the disaster contained tiny pieces of metal that had been exposed to both extreme temperatures (higher than could have been produced by a burning office or burning airplane fuel) and extreme pressure (such as an explosion) that would fragment material into minute particles. Official reports ignore this.

• In December, physicist Steven Jones announced the discovery of thermite chips in World Trade Center dust samples. The chemical composition of these chips are an exact match to known thermite samples used in controlled demolitions — further corroboration that explosive devices were involved.

• Steel support beams recovered from the site of the World Trade Center exhibit cut edges that are characteristic of thermite used to slice steel support beams in building demolitions but are not characteristic of steel beams that have been burned in a fire.

When the 9/11 Commission Report was finally released, it was woefully inadequate. It never even addressed the collapse of Building 7, for example. Former FBI Director Louis Freeh has stated that there are inaccuracies in the report and unanswered questions. Even the two chairmen of the 9/11 Commission — Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton — have accused the CIA of "obstructing" the commission, and one commissioner, U.S. Sen. Max Cleland, resigned, stating that the commission was "compromised."

Private individuals with specialized knowledge — scientists, engineers, architects, demolitions experts, and the firefighters and police officers who were on the scene on Sept. 11, 2001, have tested theories, constructed models, provided testimony, and dug for the truth about what really happened on 9/11. They have been ignored by media and the government.

The mainstream media parrot the less-than-credible conclusions of the 9/11 Commission without giving any thought to the many omissions and inconsistencies. In a truly free country, the press would ask hard questions and do real investigating, but this is not happening. Only the alternative media, such as Internet news sites, have done any solid investigating.

The events of 9/11 led immediately to the creation of the Department of Homeland Security and passage of the Patriot Act (what double-speak), both of which deprive us of Constitutional rights and have brought us to the brink of becoming a police state. Homeland Security is currently trying to force a national ID card down our throats, although some governors have politely (or not so politely) told Secretary Michael Chertoff where he can go.

If we're going to sacrifice our freedom, there ought to be a very good reason, and we have a right to know what that is. It isn't enough for government to say, "Trust me." It's way past time for Congress to authorize an independent investigation of 9/11 that will consider the mass of new evidence that has been gathered in the past seven years. The longer they stall, the more suspicions grow.

Sen. Karen S. Johnson, R-Mesa, represents District 18.


9/11 Conspiracy Connection To DC Madam Murder

Palfrey told former NSA official that call girls had picked up information concerning foreknowledge of attacks

Former NSA analyst and Navy intelligence officer Wayne Madsen tells the The Alex Jones Show that one of the key motives behind the DC Madam's murder may have been the information her call girls picked up from Washington's top brass concerning foreknowledge and government complicity in the 9/11 attacks.

Madsen also connected another suspicious death - that of former CIA agent Roland Carnaby who was gunned down by Houston police last week - to another individual who was involved in both the 9/11 cover-up and the D.C. Madam scandal, disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

Noting that Palfrey and her defense team had tried to invoke the Classified Information Procedures Act in the U.S. District Court in Washington, which is only used when classified information or the names of people who are intelligence officers needs to be discussed, Madsen said Palfrey, "Had information which could have a bearing on the 9/11 attacks that some of her employees may have picked up information beforehand that would have been very useful to the 9/11 investigation."

Madsen added that most of Palfrey's call girls had been active around the area of McLean Virginia, which is where the CIA and other intelligence agencies are based and where Dick Cheney lived at the time.

Host Alex Jones recalled that during interviews Palfrey had told him that her escort service was in fact being used as an intelligence operation to gather intelligence on individuals who used the service, particularly those connected to the military.

Madsen, who spoke personally to Palfrey on numerous occasions, recalls one conversation at dinner about a month a go with Palfrey and her asset forfeiture lawyer where Palfrey told him, 'I have information that would have been of great interest to the 9/11 Commission - there's information that they have (her call girls) that would have been very important for the 9/11 Commission to know having to do with intelligence they picked up about 9/11 before it happened'.

The former NSA official noted that some of Palfrey's call girls were being chauffeured by Sherlington Limousines to poker parties attended by former CIA director and co-chair of the Joint 9/11 Intelligence Inquiry Porter Goss. One of the reasons cited for Goss' abrupt resignation in May 2006 was his alleged involvement in a prostitution scandal where lobbyists were holding parties for GOP lawmakers that featured hookers and gambling at the Watergate Hotel in D.C.

On the morning of 9/11, Goss was having breakfast with the head of Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) General Mahmoud Ahmad, the man who ordered a wire transfer of $100,000 to alleged lead hijacker Mohammed Atta.


Deborah Jeane Palfrey.

In addition, Madsen pointed out that Jack Abramoff, who was also connected to the DC Madam scandal, allowed at least two of the 9/11 hijackers to use one of his casino boats in the days before 9/11, and this is what Palfrey was probably referring to when she spoke about her call girls picking up information about 9/11 before it happened.

"There's the link, when you've got Abramoff and you had two of those hijackers on his casino boat a few days before 9/11 - I just wonder if that's what Jeane was talking about," said Madsen, "Because now I'm looking at this crazy incident in Houston with Roland Carnaby, a retired CIA guy who was still contracted to the CIA, being gunned down in broad daylight by the Houston police department - now I've been told by Agency sources in Houston that one of the people he was looking at was Abramhoff and the casino boats - so here you've got two people in the same week, looks like they were both assassinated in broad daylight," he concluded.

Many readers will recall that Newsweek reported that military brass in Washington received a warning the night before the 9/11 attacks which led to a September 11 flight being cancelled. "NEWSWEEK has learned that while U.S. intelligence received no specific warning, the state of alert had been high during the past two weeks, and a particularly urgent warning may have been received the night before the attacks, causing some top Pentagon brass to cancel a trip. Why that same information was not available to the 266 people who died aboard the four hijacked commercial aircraft may become a hot topic on the Hill," according to the September 13 2001 issue.

The connection to 9/11 is tantalizing and provides a key motive for why numerous power brokers would have wanted Palfrey to be shut up for good before she had the opportunity to release information in court that her call girls picked up about 9/11 pointing to foreknowledge and government complicity in the attacks.

RELATED: Overwhelming Evidence Points To Murder Of DC Madam

RELATED: Corporate Media Ignores Palfrey's Statement She Would Not Commit Suicide

RELATED: DC Madam Predicted She Would Be Suicided

RELATED: Palfrey Considered Call Girl's "Suicide" Possible Murder


9/11 theorist not curtailing his research

Sixteen months ago, Brigham Young University and Steven Jones parted ways, but he said this week he isn't bitter about the academic divorce.

He certainly hasn't curtailed his volatile research on the collapse of the three World Trade Center towers after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

(Yes, three towers fell, not just two. If you didn't know that, Jones is particularly interested in reaching you with his message that some other group, in addition to al-Qaida, likely contributed to the collapses.)

In fact, Jones is the lead author of a paper on the collapses published April 18 in a civil engineering journal.

The journal article does not list his past tie to BYU, and that's a big Mission Accomplished for university leaders, who felt they acted to protect BYU's reputation when they worked out a retirement package with Jones and he left at the end of 2006.

But Jones is sharing a cramped BYU office with some professors. He also does research in a BYU lab as an outside user with a student who works with him.

Most importantly, he is preparing several more papers that, if they pass peer review and are published, will give him the peace of mind that his case reached the public.

Jones was energized in November when he and others received a response from the national lab charged by Congress to determine why and how the towers collapsed. The letter contained the following phrase:

"We are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse."

"That," Jones said, "really was progress. It made me believe we could talk with them."

It is striking. After producing a 10,000-page report, the National Institute of Standards and Technology can't explain the collapse. And on its Web site, NIST clearly states that nowhere in its report did it say that steel in the Twin Towers melted due to fires. In fact, the fires reached only 1,000 degrees Celsius. Steel melts at 1,500 degrees Celsius.

Meanwhile, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has said that its best hypothesis for the fall of the third tower, WTC 7 — diesel fuel stored in the building caused fires that collapsed the building — has a "low probability" of being correct.

At the time of his separation with BYU, which he admitted was painful, Jones found himself burned by his association with a loose confederation of 9/11 truth-seekers, some of them clearly kooky conspiracy theorists, and by some of his own statements.

Now, he and a number of scientific colleagues are taking a more cautious, mainstream approach.

His new peer-reviewed paper in the Open Civil Engineering Journal doesn't rip NIST or FEMA or the government. It does just the opposite. It lays out 14 points of agreement Jones and his colleagues have with the official government reports.

"We're getting to a higher level of discussion with this paper," Jones said.

The open paper can be found for free on the Web at

So what does Jones think happened?

Jones wants NIST to look at new evidence he found in Ground Zero dust samples since leaving BYU. The dust is full of iron-rich spheres and red-gray chips with the chemical signatures of high-tech cutter-charge explosives that he said could explain the collapsed towers. The spheres come from molten metal that Jones said could be caused by cutter charges.

"It's like when you spray water into the air, you get droplets," Jones said. "These spheres are evidence of extremely high temperatures beyond what the fires could have reached."

He's offered samples to NIST and invited NIST to visit one of his group's labs. A NIST spokesman has said that would be a waste of taxpayer dollars, though Jones said the cost would be less than $5,000.

Jones is cautious with money himself. He and his wife are selling off their real-estate investments to make ends meet, but he said they are comfortable and about to move to Sanpete County.

"I haven't profited a penny off this," he said. "I don't want to, and I've been careful not to. I'm concerned about the country, and I'm worried the truth is being covered up here."

He's careful not to speculate about a cover-up, though he said the growing dissatisfaction with the war in Iraq has made many more people receptive to his research.

Would it really hurt the people at NIST to talk to him once?


Tell Me Again Why "Conspiracy Theory" is a Dirty Label

Whenever any claim is made that the government has done anything wrong, government apologists say "that's a conspiracy theory!"

Well, let's examine what the people trained to weigh evidence and reach conclusions think about "conspiracies". Let's look at what American judges think.

Searching Westlaw, one of the 2 primary legal research networks which attorneys and judges use to research the law, I searched for court decisions including the word "Conspiracy". This is such a common term in lawsuits that it overwhelmed Westlaw. Specifically, I got the following message:

"Your query has been intercepted because it may retrieve a large number of documents."

From experience, I know that this means that there were potentially millions or many hundreds of thousands of cases which use the term. There were so many cases, that Westlaw could not even start processing the request.

So I searched again, using the phrase "Guilty of Conspiracy". I hoped that this would not only narrow my search sufficiently that Westlaw could handle it, but would give me cases where the judge actually found the defendant guilty of a conspiracy. This pulled up exactly 10,000 cases -- which is the maximum number of results which Westlaw can give at one time. In other words, there were more than 10,000 cases using the phrase "Guilty of Conspiracy" (maybe there's a way to change my settings to get more than 10,000 results, but I haven't found it yet).

Moreover, as any attorney can confirm, usually only appeal court decisions are published in the Westlaw database. In other words, trial court decisions are rarely published; the only decisions normally published are those of the courts which hear appeals of the trial. Because only a very small fraction of the cases which go to trial are appealed, this logically means that the number of guilty verdicts in conspiracy cases at trial must be much, much larger than 10,000.

Moreover, "Guilty of Conspiracy" is only one of many possible search phrases to use to find cases where the defendant was found guilty of a lawsuit for conspiracy. Searching on Google, I got 222,000 results under the term "Guilty of Conspiracy", 24,700 results for the search term "Convictions for Conspiracy", and 7,590 results for "Convicted for Conspiracy".

Given the above, I would extrapolate that there have been hundreds of thousands of convictions for criminal or civil conspiracy in the United States.

Finally, many crimes go unpunished, and the perpetrators are never caught. Therefore, the actual number of conspiracies committed in the U.S. must be even higher.

In other words, conspiracies are committed all the time in the U.S., and many of the conspirators are caught and found guilty by American courts. Indeed, conspiracy is a very well-recognized crime in American law, taught to every first-year law school student as part of their basic curriculum. Telling a judge that someone has a "conspiracy theory" would be like telling him that someone is claiming that he trespassed on their property, or committed assault, or stole his car. Its a fundamental legal concept.

So tell me again why "conspiracy theory" is a dirty label . . .

Obviously, people will either win or lose in court depending on whether or not they can prove their claim with the available evidence. Not all conspiracy allegations are true; neither are all allegations of trespass, assault, or theft. Proving a claim of conspiracy is no different from proving any other legal claim, and the mere label "conspiracy" is taken no less seriously by judges.


Thursday, May 1, 2008

Elitist Blueprint For World Government Revealed

New book written by insider - 6,000 globalists control the planet and plan to completely end national sovereignty, manifesto for dealing with "antiglobalist" resistors unveiled

A new book written by a leading globalist luminary provides a blueprint for how 6,000 elitists plan to completely end national sovereignty, impose a system of global governance, and how they will deal with an international network of people that resist their agenda.

Superclass: The Global Power Elite and the World They Are Making is a manifesto for how the elite plan to shape the course of the planet and impose a new world order while combating the inevitable "global network of antiglobalists" who will rise up against it.

The author of the book, David J. Rothkopf, is a visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and has previously served as the Deputy Undersecretary of Commerce for International Trade during the administration of Bill Clinton before he became managing director of Kissinger and Associates in January 1996.

A review alarmingly details the brazen premise of Rothkopf's book - a global elite now run the planet and have usurped the power of national governments while ensuring laws constrained by borders are all but obsolete.

"Each one of them is one in a million. They number six thousand on a planet of six billion. They run our governments, our largest corporations, the powerhouses of international finance, the media, world religions, and, from the shadows, the world's most dangerous criminal and terrorist organizations. They are the global superclass, and they are shaping the history of our time," states the promo for the book.

The threadbare notion that Rothkopf's book is a critical and impartial investigation of the global elite can be rejected out of hand just by looking at the author's biography - in reality he is a cherished insider.

Throughout the book Rothkopf fawns over the global elite of which he too is a member. The Salon review notes his "palpable thrill" at "recognizing CEOs, oil company executives and Harvard professors on his way to a fondue restaurant," in the globalist enclave of Davos, Switzerland and his obsession with listing every banal "achievement" of each elitist he speaks with.

According to the article, the kind of elitist celebrated in Rothkopf's book "have little need for national loyalty, view national boundaries as obstacles that thankfully are vanishing, and see national governments as residues from the past whose only useful function is to facilitate the elite's global operations."

Rothkopf himself concurs that laws and regulations defined by borders and nation states are obsolete and need to be replaced not by a global government but by "global governance". The fact that the ultimate goals of the two - the total elimination of national sovereignty - are essentially identical is not lost on globalists who know that a more subtle imposition of centralized control needs to be enacted in order to con the serfs into sacrificing their identity. A sharply defined "world government" is too visceral a concept and would attract fierce opposition, therefore a method of forcing countries to adopt harmonized policies of "global governance" is the new approach that globalists have embarked on.

Rothkopf ominously expresses the plan to mandate the "Registration and management of Internet domain names (via a collection of organizations)" under a global umbrella, which the informed will recognize as a bastardized version of Internet 2, where individuals require government permits to operate a website under tight regulation.

The article concedes that, "Rational as it may sound to set up such systems, they just aren't directly answerable to the populace at large -- they're undemocratic," which Rothkopf admits will give rise to rebellions and pave the way for more people like Venezuela's Hugo Chavez, who he labels as being part of "the global network of antiglobalists," and a man who has "made political theater out of taunting and thwarting the global elite."

Rothkopf's answer to the inevitable antagonism that will be directed towards the globalists as their agenda unfolds is to hoodwink the commoners into thinking they have influence in the new world order that is being built around them - a method otherwise known as the Delphi Technique, which is universally recognized as an underhanded and unethical ploy of achieving consensus through deception.

According to Rothkopf the, "Superclass ought to be smart enough to foresee any such crisis and head it off by doing more to make the currently disenfranchised feel like "stakeholders" in the new global order."

The fact that the same elitists Rothkopf affords such sycophantic adulation are also personally responsible for the policies that result in the slaughter of untold millions and the misery of countless others across the globe matters little to Rothkopf, who also has no qualms about including Osama Bin Laden in a group of 6,000 "global elite" who now control the world and "whose connections to each other have become more significant than their ties to their home nations and governments."

Superclass maintains that the elite, who mainly comprise "older males of European descent who graduated from prestigious Western colleges," are "an improvement on those of the past," but this rings hollow when we consider the state of the planet that they have crafted.

A million-plus dead Iraqis since 2003, a global economy in chaos and individual freedom under attack in every corner of the world suggests the much-vaunted global elite - worshipped in Rothkopf's book as saviors of the Earth - are more accurately parasites and a cancer upon humanity.

Watch Rothkopf give a lecture on the power of the global elite. He identifies Bohemian Grove as a key meeting venue for the globalists. Decide for yourself whether he is a fawning sycophant or an objective critic. Rothkopf creates a false paradigm by claiming that freedom is at the opposite end of the scale to justice and essentially argues that the world's problems can only be solved by moving away from freedom towards justice, which is a complete contradiction in terms.

Rothkopf's approach is to blame the world's problems on free-market capitalism and and imply that global elitists are a new phenomenon and therefore part of the solution, when in reality the elite created monopoly capitalism and have been a hidden-hand manipulating world events and offering solutions to problems they created for centuries.


Secret Wiretap Warrants Double Since 9/11

The number of secret warrants used in counterterrorism and espionage cases have more than doubled since the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, according to an annual Justice Department report released today.

For 2007, the department confirms that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), the secret court that approves such warrants, approved 2,370 requests, compared to 1012 in 2000.

The report is required under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which allows the FBI to conduct court-approved secret domestic searches and wiretapping after presenting applications to the FISC for warrants.

In conjunction with the increased submissions made to the FISC, the Justice Department is also setting up a new Office of Intelligence to handle the increased FISA work. The Office of Intelligence will be part of the Justice Department's National Security Division.

Full article here.


Aviation companies blame FBI, CIA and terrorists for 9/11

Aviation companies sued by the families of Sept. 11 victims for failing to safeguard air travel are in turn blaming federal investigators — arguing the Federal Aviation Administration was not alerted that al-Qaida was poised to launch terrorist attacks.

In court documents filed this week in U.S. District Court in Manhattan, aviation companies are seeking to force five FBI employees to provide testimony that may help defend against claims the companies share blame in the attacks.

"The aviation parties anticipate that the FBI witnesses' testimony will demonstrate that the FBI had information before Sept. 11 indicating that al-Qaida may have been about to launch terrorist attacks on civil aviation, which it did not timely pass along to the Federal Aviation Administration," lawyers wrote.

The airlines and aviation companies are defending themselves against lawsuits seeking billions of dollars in damages for injuries, fatalities, property damage and business losses related to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attack.

The companies in turn filed separate lawsuits against the CIA and the FBI last August to force terrorism investigators to tell whether the aviation industry was to blame for the Sept. 11 attacks.

The latest documents filed by the airlines, airport authorities, security companies and an aircraft manufacturer argue that if the FAA had known about an FBI investigation of Zacarias Moussaoui weeks before the Sept. 11 attacks, it could have amended security measures to guard against the type of terrorist attack Moussaoui was planning.

The aviation defendants said the FBI has refused to permit even a single deposition, although the agency does not deny that five potential witnesses in the case have already testified and made other public statements before the 9/11 Commission, the Moussaoui trial jury and the media.

Full article here.


Believe in 9/11 Truth? Newt Says You’re Insane

It's the only response a high-ranking neocon can provide, considering all the evidence and questions unanswered: anybody who believes 9/11 was an inside job, or for that matter questions the official fairy tale version, is insane.

And this is precisely what Newt Gingrich told Matt Lepacek of We Are Change — he is insane. No debate, no further conversation. He's crazy and so are millions of other people, from the guy who has questions about the irrationality of fires toppling steel buildings to the full-blown 9/11 truth activist. Nuts. Bonkers. Not worth more than a few dismissive words.

Matt asked Sir Gingrich about his membership in the CFR, if he is indeed a 33 degree Mason, and if he ever visited Bohemian Grove. Nope, said Newt. He is not a Mason. And nope, he never visited Bohemian Grove. He didn't answer the question about the CFR. Because he ranks high on the CFR totem pole.

Stock market

Newt Gingrich at the Grove, published in the Annals of the Bohemian Club (vol 7), 1987-1996.

Newt was telling a fib. Because he did indeed attend Bohemian Grove. He was in attendance back in 1995 when Dubya and Senior gave "lakeside talks." A photo (at right) was published in the Annals of the Bohemian Club (vol 7), 1987-1996. Bet Newt didn't know we knew about that one. Oops. See more photos and a write-up at Infowars.

When not lounging at the Grove, Newt has a prestigious and very relevant position over at the Council on Foreign Relations. He is on the "Terrorism Task Force," and it figures of course because he is a full-blown neocon. In addition to the CFR, Gingrich rubs elbows over at the American Enterprise Institute — when Bush mentions his "minds," picked from AEI, he is talking about guys like Newt. The AEI is a primo neocon organization, counting as members other sinister figures, such as John Bolton, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, John Yoo, and David Frum. So upset was Frum the other day, he physically attacked Stewart Howe and his camera for asking what Newt would likely characterize as insane questions, questions Mr. Frum, who should be arrested for assault, did not want to answer because he is guilty as sin.

In fact, Newt Gingrich is a war criminal at large. He was Bush's Defense Policy Board — along with other war criminals, such as Richard Perle (as chairman), James Woolsey, Ken Adelman, Eliot Cohen, and the pathetic Dan Quayle — and this coterie of hand-picked neocons set in motion the invasion of Iraq and the ultimate murder of more than a million Iraqis. Gingrich compounded his crimes by working with the now-defunct Committee for the Liberation of Iraq and the recently revived Committee on the Present Danger. The former was a PNAC contrivance run by former Lockheed Martin vice president Bruce Jackson and stinking with perfidious neocons, including William Kristol, Robert Kagan, Joe Lieberman, and the above mentioned Richard "Prince of Darkness" Perle and James Woolsey. All serious war criminals of Nuremberg caliber.

Well, at least Newt didn't attack Matt, not like David Frum would have probably done in the same situation. Instead, he refused to make eye contact, dismissed his questioner as insane, and denied two out of three accusations pointing to his position in the New World Order, neocon division. Newt can play both sides of the fence, though.

No doubt, come January of 2009, he will play with Hillary's team as well. But then Hillary says the sort of things Newt wants to hear. She wants to bomb Iran – the word she used, I believe, was "obliterate" — and that's precisely the next objective of the neocons.

I bet they realize their objective before Hillary gets anywhere near the White House.


TruthgoneWild is PRO America. TruthgoneWild is not, in any way, connected to, or supportive of, any person(s) who engage in violent acts towards anyone or anything, for any reason. TruthgoneWild is not, and will never be, associated with, or support, any person(s) who are involved with any kind of religious, extremist, occultist, terrorist organization(s). TruthgoneWild is not responsible for any of the people who read the TruthgoneWild blog. TruthgoneWild posts consist of information copied from other sources and a source link is provided for the reader. TruthgoneWild is not responsible for any of the authors' content. Parental discretion is advised.

TruthgoneWild is exercising our 1st Amendment right to freedom of speech. Those who attempt to hinder this right to free speech will be held accountable for their actions in a court of law. TruthgoneWild is not anti government. TruthgoneWild is anti corruption. And we the people have every right to know who in our government is corrupt.