Posted on 12/05/2001 12:00:36 PM PST by Magician
WHO'S TRULY BEHIND THE ATTACK ON AMERICA? Many people have compared the horrendous terrorist attack on New York's World Trade Center and the Pentagon in Washington to the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941. It is an apt comparison, though not for the reasons most people think.
For true students of history, it is now nearly beyond dispute that certain high-ranking officials in Washington, D. C. knew in advance of the Japanese intention to attack the U.S. fleet in Hawaii, yet did nothing to prevent it.
President Roosevelt, who at the time was blatantly violating the Neutrality Act, has been quoted as saying, "A Japanese attack on us.would certainly fulfill two of the most important requirements of our policy [to engage America in the war despite his pledge to keep us out of war.]"
Must the citizens of the United States wait another 50 years to learn that the 9-11 terrorist attack was allowed to take place just like Pearl Harbor?
Could such an appalling scenario possibly be true? Consider the comment of Kenneth Katzman, a terrorist expert with the Congressional Research Service, who told the Washington Post, "How nothing could have been picked up [by U.S. intelligence agencies regarding the coming attack] is beyond me."
Simple countermeasures against such an attack now seem apparent. For example, if the airlines would assigned just one armed plainclothes security man to each flight, this tragedy may have been averted since apparently the hijackers were armed only with knives or other type blades. So, how were they able to overpower a plane load of people and, more importantly, gain access to the cockpits? Who taught them to fly jumbo jets?
As in the case of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, the key to understanding the event lies not in who actually committed the violence but rather who was able to strip away the normal security protection.
Government and airline officials knew immediately that planes had been hijacked, yet no interceptors appeared in the air until after the attacks were completed. Who stripped away the normal security protection of America on 9-11?
At least in this most recent case, the government cannot blame the attack on a lone deranged individual, some Lee Harvey McVeigh. They must deal with a full-blown conspiracy, even though authorities were quick to point the finger at Osama bin-Laden. Any investigation of bin-Laden must look beyond the man, to the backers and financiers behind him.
The trail of the terrorists will most probably become murky, with plenty of accusations for all concerned. But one thing appears quite clear, the tragic events of 9-11 play right into the hands of persons with an agenda aimed at eroding American liberties and sovereignty.
After decades of bloated and misused defense budgets, there are now calls for doubling our defense allocation. In a time of rising recognition that the CIA is an agency never sought by the public and one which has brought so much condemnation on this nation, there are now cries for doubling its size and budget. If the chief security officer for a large company fails to protect one of its most prized assets, is he more likely to be fired or have his pay doubled?
Watch for more anti-terrorist legislation to further shred the U.S. Constitution. As we all scramble to deal with the effects of terrorism, are we in danger of losing our few remaining individual liberties? The media blithely reported that each of the cell phone calls made by doomed passengers on the hijacked airliners was recorded by the government. Doesn't this mean that all cell phone calls are, or can be, recorded? Whatever happened to telephone privacy? Where is the indignant outcry over such Big Brotherism.
But the biggest threat comes from the inner elite of the globalist societies. Within hours of the attack, the television and radio airwaves were full of ranking Council on Foreign Relations members, such as Henry Kissinger, Wesley Clark, Alexander Haig and Strobe Talbot. Talbot, President Clinton's deputy secretary of state, told Time magazine in 1992, "In the next century [today], nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority."
No matter who was speaking, their "party line" was the same: terrible tragedy, find and punish those responsible, stop terrorism. But, of course, since terrorists move between national boundaries, we must joined with other "freedom loving" nations and work with the United Nations and NATO to combat this new menace. This is a thinly-disguised effort to have a mourning and emotional American public stampeded into their New World Order.
Also, consider that we are distracted from a faltering economy [the current crisis may require more federal financial controls], a plummeting public opinion of George W. Bush and surging energy prices. Would leaders allow a public disaster to happen with an eye toward advancing their agendas? It's happened before. in Nero's burning Rome, Germany's gutted Reichstag, at Pearl Harbor and gain at the Gulf of Tonkin. While we should grieve for our losses, we must keep our heads. When the emotions of the moment run hot, we must remain cool and thoughtful so that we can find who is truly behind this attack on America.
FAST-TRACKING THE GLOBAL AGENDA UNDER THE COVER OF WAR
(It's) Official White House Press Release on the Caspian Sea Pipeline.
Yeah, pretty much. A piece here, a piece there. Little pieces, mostly. Although about ten minutes ago, they just pulled another largish piece of a human body out of the rubble and gave it the flag-and-stretcher treatment. Every now and then, they do still find a mostly-whole body. But mostly they find pieces. Out at the landfill there are even more people than at Ground Zero, literally running the dust through sifters to find bone fragments. Every piece will be DNA-tested. Eventually we will know how many separate individuals were recovered at the site.
You really put any credence in the "take 220 storeys and do the math" method? That assumes that everyone in both buildings was "trapped" as though they were above the impact zone, like Cantor Fitzgerald, and that nobody was able to get out at all, even though they had almost an hour to escape Tower 2 and about an hour and forty-five minutes to get out of Tower 1. Yet this paragraph seems to suggest that 38,000+ people managed to die that day without anyone knowing about it, including the people themselves (they're at work, most of them, in the new offices their companies relocated to. They don't have a clue that they're really dead. Neither do their families and friends, who never reported them missing and continue to interact with them in a normal manner).
The only hope I hold out for this Chamish fellow is that there are quotes around the various paragraphs; so maybe these paragraphs in quotations are all wild-ass theories that various uninformed nutbars suggested to him during his travels, instead of this own "thoughts" on the subject. IF these are his own conclusions, though, he's a loon.
There was no precedent that suggested the intent of the hijackers to use the planes as suicide cruise missiles against buildings. Previous hijackers made demands and threatened only the lives of the passengers.
BTW, do you know where I can get real tinfoil? I don't trust that aluminum stuff!
Some conspiracy-minded folks are suspicious of our government deliberately inflating the death toll to whip up the war fever and give carte blanche to any action the government decides to take; yet this guy thinks they're suppressing the deaths of tens of thousands. And you seem to think the idea is reasonable. So tell me, what would be the motive for covering up the deaths of 38,500 people? And how would they hope to get away with it, considering the number of witnesses and survivors, not to mention the families of the 38,500? Hmm?
Fee Fie Foe Fum, I smell the blood of a DU Troll!
If you were a grieving member of a family, how would you really know how many other grieving families there were?
Passenger manifests of the four aircraft list a bunch of people. Flight 93 crashing because the PASSENGERS on board attempted to regain control of the aircraft from the PEOPLE who hijacked it.
OK, my facts to the contrary are posted.
Usama is really just my cut-out. He's actually one of my indestructible killing machines. Well, OK, he's a proto-type. So there's a few bugs in the programming. Sue me.
Anyhoot, see you carbon based life forms at the coming armeggedon!
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaa....< cough, hack... >
Utterly beside the point (and it doesn't answer my question as to motive, either). Most of these people don't know each other. The people who worked together in the same companies DID know each other. What would induce them to keep quiet? Don't you think any of them have, at the very least, looked at the list of names for people they personally knew? Wouldn't the absence of the name of somebody they KNEW didn't make it out that day set off an alarm? Provoke phone calls to relatives of the deceased, and to reporters? Remember, 700 per four floors. 38,500 people. Too many to be ignored or swept under the rug. This happened in New York, not Antartica.
If you were an employee of a business formerly located in the World Trade Center, wouldn't you notice the huge number of your coworkers who failed to show up at their new offices, or who suddenly couldn't be reached anymore? And I'm still wondering how it would be in anyone's interest (with the exception of America's enemies) to downplay the death toll, rather than inflate it. You don't have even a speculative reply for that..
If the numbers are in the tens of thousands, perhaps that would set off more of an investigation. We will probably also part company on this--I am not buying that only those planes took down those buildings.
Did you read the story in the link I provided? Do you give her an outside chance of being believed?
And no, it wasn't "good for me, too"...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.