Biden Brings His Prophecy to the Emerald City

Joe Biden the seemingly clairvoyant senator from Delaware, and vice presidential nominee was out making predictions, again. The last time Joe was using his crystal ball was on September 10, 2001, one day prior to the 9/11 attacks.

He was at the national press club when he made an astounding prediction, that came true hours later. "We will have diverted all that money to address the least likely threat while the real threats come into this country in the hold of a ship, or the belly of a plane, or are smuggled into a city in the middle of the night in a vial in a backpack."

Just this past Sunday, while out fundraising in Seattle Washington, Biden spoke about what he saw the future looking like, and this time he was much more precise. He offers a timeline, a JFK comparison, and a crisis.

"Mark my words...It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy...Remember I said it standing here if you don't remember anything else I said. Watch, we're gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy."

He also offers four or five scenarios that, according to ABC news, include the middle east, Russia, a nuclear capable Pakistan, and of course Osama bin Laden. Biden wants to remind you that al Qaeda is everywhere, "and its real"! Still, all that fear mongering was not nearly as concerning as his warning of our civil unrest, here we are only offered a McGuffin - but what he is saying is chilling.

"we're gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it's not gonna be apparent initially, it's not gonna be apparent that we're right."

"Because I promise you, you all are gonna be sitting here a year from now going, 'Oh my God, why are they there in the polls? Why is the polling so down? Why is this thing so tough?' We're gonna have to make some incredibly tough decisions in the first two years. So I'm asking you now, I'm asking you now, be prepared to stick with us. Remember the faith you had at this point because you're going to have to reinforce us."

He is seriously asking us to just trust him, stick with us later no matter what, take whatever we give you, don't question, "the one" because he will know better than you. He Promises that whatever is going to happen will probably make everyone so mad that the illusion may not hold; but look away, continue your quest for hope. Any type of event would be difficult to pull off, there is little trust for government in America right now, low approval ratings all around. In reality there will be no change from Obama, and at the very least, we will notice and six months into his presidency they will no longer be able to hide it.

"There are gonna be a lot of you who want to go, 'Whoa, wait a minute, yo, whoa, whoa, I don't know about that decision...Because if you think the decision is sound when they're made, which I believe you will when they're made, they're not likely to be as popular as they are sound. Because if they're popular, they're probably not sound."

This is when they'll begin to squeeze and we will not have any say because it is just too big for the non intellectuals to get,

"It's so much more important than that. It's so much more complicated than that. And Barack gets it."

Biden is outlining some kind of event that may lead to a sick dictatorship, where the eroded Constitution will come in handy, as will the new laws that the bush presidency put on the books, like PDD 51. We cannot just trust Biden, especially when he's predicting "international crisis" , Biden was linked closely to the financiers of the 9/11 attacks. In the days following 9/11, he met with Pakistani ISI General Mahmood Ahmed, the man who gave the order to get one hundred thousand dollars wired to Mohammed Atta.

Biden claims to have met with Ahmed to pepper him with threats, but has offered no reason why he let them leave the US without any investigation at all. Although he has been confronted on these issues by the independent media, the main stream media has failed to cover this topic, and has been forgotten throughout his race towards victory.

We cannot forget, because warnings like the one he gave in the Emerald City on Sunday, must be drawn out and put on display. The line we are walking is fine, we are heading down an uncomfortable path. They have a grip on the children who will become men and woman during the Obama Regime. Children singing his praises, "we're gonna change it, and rearrange it" . And young men dressing up in military gear, ripping out their individuality and self worth pledging to be - "because of Obama".

Biden was speaking in riddles but it is not too hard to figure out that it doesn't sound very good. Within a year we will be questioning President Barack Hussein Obama. Bush had a rough first few months too, 9/11 changed that. There appears to be a definite plan here, as well as a message:

America will be changing, and your not going to like it.

Source

CIA’s Robert Baer knows guy who ‘cashed out’ day before 9/11

On 9/11 prior knowledge, and perhaps a clue towards the put options on the day of 9/11: “I know the guy that went into his broker in San Diego and said ‘cash me out, it’s going down tomorrow.’”

He then went on to say that this man’s “brother worked in the White House.”

On October 16, 2008, Robert Baer, who was a CIA Case Officer in the Middle East over the course of almost two decades, participated in a discussion at the Hammer Museum entitled “A Third War: The Threat of War with Iran.” Dr. Trita Parsi was part of the discussion which was moderated by Ian Masters.

Baer was briefly interrupted during the discussion by Jeremy Rothe-Kushel for clarity’s sake, after he brought up 9/11 and reaffirmed his recently aired belief that Osama bin Laden is likely dead. That part went something like this-

Bob: The chances of Bin Laden being dead are very high. The question is are they going to drag him out in the next two weeks. Is he going to [laughter] out of cold storage and say “we finally got him.” I don’t know that he’s dead, but he probably is.

Jeremy: But he didn’t do 9/11 though.

Bob: Well, let’s put it this way, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind…

Jeremy: No.

Bob: …said he wasn’t working for Bin Laden, so…

Jeremy: Did Khalid Sheikh Mohammed put the Mossad assets in New Jersey to film?

Bob: …No he’s talking about the famous white van. It’s an intriguing story. It deserves a book…
———–
After the event, Baer graciously granted WeAreChangeLA members Stewart Howe and Jeremy Rothe-Kushel an interview in front of the Hammer Museum on Wilshire Boulevard. Although he avoided dealing with the operational aspects of the 9/11 attacks, Mr. Baer appeared to affirm or suggest Israeli Mossad and White House foreknowledge of the attacks. Baer laid out his take on a benign scenario for the “famous white van” associated with Mossad agents detained on 9/11 after being seen filming and celebrating the attacks. Baer also said that it could mean something “worse.”

At the end of the interview Baer makes a very provocative statement:

“I know the guy that went into his broker in San Diego and said ‘cash me out, it’s going down tomorrow.’”

He then went on to say that this man’s “brother worked in the White House.”

He finally appears to confirm CIA involvement in the Iranian Revolution.

Here’s some interesting info related to Baer and this subject from the great resource http://www.historycommons.org/ —-

“Before Mid-January 2002: Top CIA Official Reportedly Describes 9/11 as Triumph”

According to former CIA officer Robert Baer, a high-ranking CIA official tells a reporter off-the-record that, “when the dust finally clears, Americans will see that September 11 was a triumph for the intelligence community, not a failure.” It is unclear why the CIA officer thinks this and the reporter who tells Baer this story is not named. However, Baer comments that if that is what the CIA thinks, “Im scared to death of what lies ahead.” [BAER, 2002, PP. XXIII]

Source

Structural engineering council (CTBUH) casts doubt on NIST's WTC 7 Report.

The Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat (CTBUH) has published comments on the NIST WTC 7 Report. The CTBUH questions critical points of the NIST WTC 7 collapse theory and also highlights problems with the writing NIST report itself.

The CTBUH criticisms focus on two technical issues The conjectured failure of shear studs and bolts on the supposedly critical Column 79:

Several conclusions drawn in the NIST report on the contribution of structural
components in failure initiation are unexpected and have raised concerns
within the Council. These conclusions involve the role of both shear studs and
local global buckling of the floor beams in failure initiation. The Council
believes that the local connection performance was a significant part of the
global failure and would like to have seen a more explicit analysis of the
connection failure. (See also comment on Chapters 11-13.)

The NIST analysis (p. 353), shows that shear studs and the bolts holding the
primary Column 79 failed before the temperature of the steel reached 200˚C.
This implies a fundamental weakness that would be picked up by a
conventional PBD analysis. These temperatures are very low compared to a
fire protection test that assumes that steel loses strength at 550˚C.

The failure of shear studs is surprising, and has been modeled in a very
simplistic way, which may overestimate the failure of this element. Prior
studies and real fire cases have not previously identified shear stud failure as
a significant possibility Page 5

...

It is difficult to understand why the top bolts of the girder would fail at
connection to Column 79 Page 5

...

The report does not describe the detail failure mechanism of the girder
connection to Column 79. Since this was critical to the failure we would
expect to see diagrams of it, in its deflected, deformed shape immediately
prior to collapse. Page 7

And NIST's assertion that column buckling proceeded floor collapse:

We strongly believe that the initiating event was the
failure of the floor and the girder connections to the main column and that this
should be documented in Section 14.3.4. Page 7

...

The Council does not agree with the NIST statement that the failure was a
result of the buckling of Column 79. We believe that the failure was a result of
the collapse of the floor structure that led to loss of lateral restraint and then
buckling of internal columns. Page 10

However, the CTBUH also casts serious doubt on NIST's entire thermal expansion fairy tale by suggesting that cooling was in fact taking place around the magical Column 79 at the time of failure:

It appears that the fire on Level 12 had passed its peak in the area of Column
79. Is it possible that failure occurred as part of the cooling cycle? Page 6

And questions NIST's hypothesis about floor beams buckling both theoretically and with experimental ..

It is surprising to see in-plane buckling of the beam as being a key generation
of the initial failure, since it would be expected that the floors would bend out
of the way on their major axis, combined with a local buckling of the bottom
flange, like those found in the Cardington Fire Tests. Page 6

Finally, the CTBUH states that it finds the NIST report confusing and contradictory:

The report is rather confusing because the floor analysis is considered in
Sections 8, 11 and 12. It would be better if there was a complete
reconciliation of the analysis models. Page 6

...

In these sections NIST states that the initial failure was caused by the failure
of the floor system, in particular the connections to Column 79, that led to the
column becoming excessively slender and buckling. These statements
contradict the summary section 14.3.4 that identifies the initiating event as the
buckling of Column 79. Page 7

But don't expect the CTBUH to come out and endorse 9/11 Truth either:

The Council would like to make it clear that it sees no credibility whatsoever in
the 911 'truth movement' and we believe, with the vast majority of tall building
professionals, that all the failures at the WTC (WTC 1, 2, 5, 6 and 7) were a
direct or indirect result of the planes that were flown into the two towers. We
have carefully looked at the evidence that the 911 'truth movement' presents
and we cannot see any credible scientific evidence of a controlled demolition
on WTC 7 or any of the other WTC buildings. The Council considers that the
'truth movement' is a distraction and should not obfuscate the performance
issues which should be at the center of the debate about how best to continue
to improve and develop fire and life safety in tall buildings. Page 4

So, on the one hand the CTBUH provides at least three good reasons to dismiss the NIST report as a blatant fraud: (a) phenomenal shear-stud and bolt failure at Column 79, (b) cooling around Column 79 at the supposed time of thermal expansive failure and (c) mystical floor beam buckling. But on the other hand, the CTBUH ignores the blatant evidence of controlled demolition in WTC 7 for no technical reason what-so-ever.

(I do not include the CTBUH's insistence that floor failure proceeds column failure as a reason to disregard NIST because the idea that either could cause any kind of a collapse that could be confused with a controlled demolition is plainly absurd).

It should be note the CTBUH chairman and lead author of its NIST WTC 7 Comments, David Scott, has some interesting conflicts of interest (as apparently do his co-authors):

He was in New York on 9-11, 2001 and witnessed the attack on the World Trade Center and was part of the SEAoNY engineering team that worked at Ground Zero to assist with the search, recovery and clean-up.

Following 9-11 he was extensively involved in the industry review of design standards and procedures for tall buildings in extreme events. He has authored papers on Fire Induced Progressive Collapse, and was a reviewer of the US Governments (GSA) design requirements to mitigate progressive collapse, that were issues in 2002. He also worked extensively with Daniel Libeskind on the WTC masterplan and his design for Freedom Tower.

Source

Delta Force officer: US officials stopped plans to kill bin Laden

After September 11, 2001, a team of elite Delta Force commandos was sent into Afghanistan with an assignment to find and kill Osama bin Laden at Tora Bora — but that mission failed.

The commander of the Delta Force team has now written a book which tells what he says is the true story of what went wrong. He appeared anonymously on CBS’s 60 Minutes on Sunday to summarize that story.

Bin Laden was known to be holed up at Tora Bora on a ridge with an elevation of 14,000 feet. The Delta Force team’s initial plan was to come at him from the direction he’d least expect, climbing over the mountains at his back, but that plan wasn’t approved by the higher-ups. Their second idea, to drop hundreds of landmines along the mountain passes to Pakistan to impede bin Laden’s retreat and then bring in helicopters, was also turned down.

"How often does Delta come up with a tactical plan that’s disapproved by higher headquarters?" CBS’s Scott Pelley asked the commando leader.

"In my experience, in my five years at Delta, never before," he replied.

The only remaining option was a frontal assault by 50 US Delta Force members plus their Afghan guides — and the Afghan warlord accompanying the commandos frankly told them, "I don’t think you guys can handle it." A few million dollars from the CIA quickly secured his cooperation, but only to a degree.

The Delta Force leader told CBS that the Afghan fighters went home every night, abandoning whatever territory had been gained that day. "It was almost like it was an agreement, an understanding between the two forces fighting each other," he stated When the CIA did come up with an exact location on bin Laden, it was nighttime, and the Afghan support was nowhere to be found.

"It wasn’t worth the risk at that particular moment to go up there and play cowboy," the leader told CBS. "It was better to be cautious, refit, go up there with the entire force the next day and play the battle out as we had planned." But when he attempted to move on bin Laden the next day, his Afghan allies balked, saying they had negotiated a cease fire with al Qaeda, and even drew their weapons on the Delta force team to prevent it from acting alone.

Shortly thereafter, intercepted radio communications showed that bin Laden was on the move. A cave which al Qaeda members had been seen entering was bombed for several hours, and it was thought that bin Laden had died there. But when US forces checked the cave six months later, bin Laden’s body was not found. The Delta Force leader believes he received medical treatment in a local village and then got away safely into Pakistan.

CBS News had more details here.

This video is from CBS’ 60 Minutes, broadcast October 5, 2008.

Source

U.S. DOT "On-Time" Records Of Final Flights Performed By 9/11 Aircraft Apparently Unavailable

The following is correspondence received from the U.S. Department of Transportation's Bureau of Transportation Statistics and the Office of Airline Information regarding requested information of the final flights of the 4 aircraft reportedly involved in the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Of particular interest is the final "on-time" information for American Airlines flight 77 (N644AA) and United Airlines flight 93 (N591UA). Final "on-time" information for each aircraft could eventually be compared with similar information contained by the Flight Data Recorders (FDRs) for each aircraft in order to better determine the authenticity of the information attributed to each FDR. The NTSB refuses to provide unencrypted information from these FDRs, which would also include final "on-time" information for each aircraft for flights performed before September 11, 2001.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert.Monniere@dot.gov
To: a_monaghan@cox.net
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 12:13 PM
Subject: RE: FOIA Request

I received the following response from our Office of Airline Information stating that the agency records indicate that:

“There were no flights in 2001 (August 26 to September 11, 2001) with tail numbers N591UA or N644AA.”

Robert A. Monniere

202-366-5498

RITA's Office of the Chief Counsel

U.S. DOT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: Bernard.Stankus@dot.gov
To: a_monaghan@cox.net
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 6:40 AM
Subject: RE: Clarification of FOIA Response

Dear Mr. Monaghan:

A BTS programmer conducted a search of the entire on-time data base (the only data base which captures flight information by tail number) for the tail numbers referenced in your request.

We sent you the results of the data search. Please be advised that only domestic scheduled passenger flights are reported in this data base. Charter flights and international flights are not reported. Generally, the major airlines utilize their larger aircraft on the longer international flight segments.

Also, the air carriers capture the times needed for reporting purposes by on board computers. If these planes and computers were destroyed in the events of 9-11, I am not sure if the airlines had the capability to capture the necessary data.

Bernie Stankus

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Aidan Monaghan [mailto:a_monaghan@cox.net]
Sent: Fri 6/6/2008 9:31 AM
To: Monniere, Robert
Subject: FOIA Request

Bob Monniere
Attorney Advisor
Research and Innovative Technology Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
E35-330, RTC
Washington, DC 20590

Re: Freedom of Information Act Request

Dear Mr. Monniere:

I respectfully request copies of the following records:

The final 14 days of flight history for the following commercial aircraft that were federally registered as of 9/11/2001, including dates and times of all departures and arrivals:

- American Airlines flight 77 (N644AA) and United Airlines flight 93 (N591UA)

Disclosure of the requested information to me is not in my commercial interest.

Thank you for your consideration of this request.

Sincerely,

Aidan Monaghan

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The National Transportation Safety Board refuses to provide unencrypted information generated by the FDRs contained by American Airlines flight 77 (N644AA) and United Airlines flight 93 (N591UA).

Dear Mr. Monaghan:

I write in response to your letter dated May 15, 2008, in which you appealed the response ofthe National Transportation Safety Board's FOIA Officer to your FOrA request for "copies of documentation ... which reveal specific data contained within the Solid State Flight Data Recorders (SSFDR's) recovered from ... American Airlines flight 77 and United Airlines flight 93." The Safety Board's FOIA Officer responded to your request on May 9,2008, and provided all FDR records that the Safety Board has with regard to American Airlines flight 77 and United Airlines flight 93.

Your appeal asserts that the Safety Board is obligated to convert numerous hours of raw FDR data, which the Safety Board provided to you in its response to your request, into tabular files and plots. Your appeal cites 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(3)(B), which states that agencies should provide requested records "in any form or format requested by the person if the record is readily reproducible by the agency in that form or format." I have determined that the Safety Board must deny your appeal, to the extent that you seek tabular files and plots that include dates and times within the FDR recordings for flights 77 and 93. Providing you with these files would require the Safety Board to create new records in response to your request. In addition, as explained below, to the extent that you seek these records pursuant to § 552(a)(3)(B), please note that these records are not readily reproducible in the format in which you seek them.

First, please note that the FOIA does not require agencies to create records in response to a request or query. See, e.g., Krohn v. Dep't of Iustice, 628 F.2d 195, 197-98 (D.C. Cir. 1980); Sakamoto v. EPA, 443 F. Supp. 2d 1182, 1189 (N.D. Cal. 2006); Hudgins v. IRS, 620 F. Supp. 19,21 (D.D.C. 1985). Furthermore, courts have also held that FOIA requesters may not utilize the FOIA has a means of forcing an agency to complete certain work. See Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. v. U.S. Dep't of Energy, No. 95-0952, transcript at 10 (D.D.C. Feb. 23, 1996) (bench order), vacated & remanded on other grounds, 169 F.3d 16 (D.C. Cir. 1999). If you seek tabular data and plots containing various parameters from the hours of the FDR recordings that precede the accident flights, you must import the raw data that the Safety Board has given you into a tabular data file using specialized software. For your reference, the Safety Board has previously used a software program entitled "Readout and Playback Software (RAPS)," from Flightscape, Inc. This program uses algorithms and equations to convert the data from the recorder's binary format to the text format files that you received in Excel spreadsheets.

Flightscape offers such FDR software programs commercially, under a licensing agreement; under the Safety Board's own licensing agreement with Flightscape, we are not at liberty to distribute a copy of our software to you. You may contact Flightscape at:

Flightscape, Inc.
36 Antares Drive Suite 850
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K2E 7W5
Tel: +011 (613) 225-0070
http://www.flightscape.com/

In addition, while the FOIA does require that agencies"provide me requested [record] in any form or format requested by the person if the record is readily reproducible in that form or format," 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(3)(B), courts have held that this provision does not require agencies to engage in extraordinary efforts or procure costly resources in order to reproduce a record in a specific format. Landmark Legal Found. V. EPA, 272 F. Supp. 2d 59, 63 (D.D.C. 2003) (concluding that the agency had not violated the FOIA's "readily reproducible" provision by failing to retain electronic copies of e-mail records that the agency had retained in paper form only, because "the agency may keep its files in a manner that best suits its needs"); see also Chamberlain v. Dep't of Justice, 957 F. Supp. 292, 296 (D.D.C. 1997) (holding that the agency had complied with the FOIA by offering to make visicorder charts, as well as all other original and releasable material that might be damaged by photocopying, available for review, rather than providing copies of the charts); Martin & Merrell, Inc. v. U.S. Customs Serv., 657 F. Supp. 733, 734 (S.D. Fla. 1986) (stating that the FOIA "in no way contemplates that agencies, in providing information to the public, should invest in the most sophisticated and expensive form of technology"). My staff has corresponded with the Vehicle Recorders Division within the Safety Board's Office of Research and Engineering, and confirmed that converting the existing raw FDR data from the numerous hours that preceded flights 77 and 93 would be extremely timeconsuming. In addition, isolating the times and providing the data in tabular files and plots would essentially involve creating a new record, as producing the records in the format that you suggest would require an exercise of a vehicle recorders specialist's expertise and judgment. Overall, I have carefully reviewed your appeal and determined that the FOIA does not require the Safety Board to convert the raw data from these FDR recordings into another format.

Based on the foregoing, I have determined that your appeal must be denied, to the extent that it seeks tabular data files and plots. This response constitutes the final action from the National Transportation Safety Board on your appeal. The Freedom of Information Act, 5

U.S.C. § 552, provides for judicial review ofthis determination.

Sincerely,

Joseph G. Osterman

Managing Director

Source