Monday, June 13, 2005

The Final Two Pieces - And a bit more

After a hiatus recording a demo for our fabulous new band, Wrygrass Revue, I’m back at the keyboard with a momentous announcement: a current Professor Emeritus at the University where King George the First has his criminal, er, Presidential Library, has come out with his gloves off regarding the great caper we call nine-eleven. Dr. Morgan Reynolds published a piece at the always fascinating web site of Lew Rockwell, a noted paleoconservative and follower of the Austrian school of economics embraced by American Libertarians, which makes no bones about who he thinks pulled off the Crime of the Millennium: no less than the son of the man he served as Chief Economist in his Labor Department. If you guessed the self same King George the First, you win a really big prize. That would make little king george in up to his eyeballs on the murder of not only those killed that day, but all of those subsequently dispatched in its name.

Go now to see this magnificent piece, but please come back right after you’re done.

Part, the Fourth; The Strange Collapse of WTC 1, 2 and 7

Among the least subjective of any profession we can name are the engineers who design and oversee the construction of our bridges, our mighty aircraft carriers and, of course, our high-rise buildings. These professionals are obsessively exacting, and they have a superb record for taking design criteria and ensuring the finished product more than meets those goals. During my brief stint in an engineering program, I had a professor, who jokingly said that the profession should be renamed “over-engineers” because, as he put it: “who wants to be on the design team of a project that fails and costs many human lives?” He was trying to instill early on a sense of how crucial it was that nascent members of the profession regard the responsibilities that are inherent in it.

The first US skyscrapers erected were a 10-storey building in Chicago in 1885 and a 13-storey edifice put up in Manhattan in 1889. By the time the trade towers were constructed in the mid-sixties, it is fair to say that structural engineers, particularly with the aid of powerful computers which were by then available thousands of such buildings had been erected without a single failure that was caused by fire. In fact, right up to the very day of nine-eleven, even though there had been spectacular fires in several, none had collapsed.

The designers of the WTC Towers were, no doubt the best and most experienced in the world. And they were given a rather lengthy list of contingencies to design for, including the impact of, and subsequent fuel fire, of a Boeing 707. A look at a diagram of their design, or even by studying a photo of either tower during construction reveal one of the many ways they accomplished their goal. Essentially, within the very strong outer framework that is usual in high-rises, there was a second, and much stronger, building. The inner frame consisted of 47 core box beams that were about three by one foot, and they ranged from 4” thick at the base to about ¼” at the top. This what allowed to building to sway in the face of strong winds and absorb the energy gradually. The 240 outer columns were each over a foot square and of the same thickness at any given level as the core beams, and were spaced about three feet apart. These were covered with about an inch of fireproofing.

In essence, to cause the building to fail, the massive interior spine had to be compromised, but for an aircraft to reach it, it would have to pass through the outer framework. Since airplanes are made mostly of aluminum, it was obvious that the large exterior beams would shred an incoming aircraft before it had an opportunity to impact the core beams, no closer than 200 feet away. Thus, the designers felt comfortable with such over engineering. But what about the fuel? It is common knowledge that steel requires temperatures of 2700 ° F, and jet fuel, or kerosene, burns at a maximum of only 1800° F, and then only if mixed with air in perfect proportions. The smoke so famously observed emanating from the upper reaches of the towers was black, a definite sign that the fires were oxygen starved. Thus temperatures were at least 1000° F below that required to melt the steel beams and columns. There is also the consideration that even if the temperatures were high enough, they would only be so to a very modest amount of steel they would have to affect for a collapse to occur. In fact, the chimney effect in the interiors airspace of the boxed steel would rapidly buffer the heat upward, dissipating it away from the crucial lower, and much thicker steel plating.

By comparing the fires in two other similarly designed buildings that burned far longer and more intensely than in either of the WTC buildings that failed, the fact that the framework of the former stood erect after the flames were extinguished indicates that the designers of the WTC buildings did their job well. We must look for another cause for the massive failures of the latter.

If you have not already read Dr. Reynolds penetrating piece, I refer you there now so I can avoid rephrasing his brilliant piece. But I will post my reply to him forthwith:

Dr. Reynolds,

BRAVO! At this point you join Dr. Griffin as the most credible 911 skeptics. I think you should submit this to Popular Mechanics and Scientific American and dare them to print it in rebuttal to the crap they presented. I think this ought to be submitted to every member of Congress and every federal judge, not to mention all NY state judges, as well. The astonishing thing about the official legend is how utterly lame it all is. Given the pronouncements of the PNAC boys, who arguably have more allegiance to Israel than America, the gun is still smoking.

With America starting to wake up and smell the Fascism, I think the neocon artists are getting a little nervous. What is needed is a panel consisting of a structural engineer, a demolitions expert, an experienced fire chief, and an aviation professional, perhaps all retired so they are outside the reach of the feds, to make an analysis of the two or three most glaring anomalies in the government fable, and present it both in technical language and layman speak so that the "wild-eyed conspiracy theorists" red herring is sidelined at the get go.

My firm belief is that if they get away with the 911 hoax, what little remains of Constitutional authority will vanish in the mushroom cloud of a mini-nuke over, say San Francisco. The Zionist cabal of one-worlders believes itself to be in full control at this point, and the only real opening we have is to expose them as mass murderers who will stop at nothing to fulfill their obscene greed and lust for power. To expose their predilection for sexual perversity, (see rigorousintuition.blogspot.com) would be impossible because ordinary people are too repelled by the details to ever think them true, but with 911, the proof is in the photos, the video and the witness list. I am indebted to Mr. Hufschmid for opening my 911 eyes, but a man who is a gifted researcher and writer, (his "Understanding the F-Word, American Fascism and the Politics of Illusion" is indispensable), David McGowan has put it all together at davesweb.cnchost.com in a way that only people blinded by the faith that "they wouldn't do that to their own people" can walk away unconvinced that 911 was, indeed, an inside job.

Those of us who understand the grave danger that has befallen us applaud your courage in presenting this information in a very cogent argument. I hope and pray it is yet another small step in the journey of reclaiming the world from the clutches of the vultures of crony capitalism.

Best Regards,

filboyink

Okay, I can get a little overdramatic, but then, again, I may be well short of that mark. As the news comes in, I mean the real stuff as opposed to the drivel spewed forth by the MSM, it appears that a day of reckoning is fast approaching, and commentary by such personages as Dr. Reynolds could well have a hastening influence thereupon. I shall reproduce here a piece that was published at Axis of Logic, whose editors have a brilliant eye for talent, I might add, and it will be the appetizer to Part the Fifth; What the Fuck does it all mean?

The Neocon Job May Backfire...Big Time Redux

By filboyink

At the end of January 2004, my commentary entitled The Neocon Job May Backfire...Big Time was posted at americahelhostage.com. While that site ceased to be updated shortly thereafter, it is still online and interested parties can still read the full text of that piece. Briefly, however, it was simply pointing out that Bush had to bow to al-Sistani because of the fact that his people could not only make the occupation forces lives far more dangerous, they could also block the only real exit from Iraq into Kuwait. Therefore, it was clear the neocons would have to agree to elections, for which any schoolchild, possibly even Bush, could predict the outcome. But they figured that if they could rig two consecutive elections here at home, why not one in a country being occupied by US military forces? It appears they did fudge the numbers for the al-Sistani slate from close to 60% down below the point where there would have been a sufficient majority to instate a republic based on Islamic law, and so the Kurds were bolstered to the point that the train wreck would at least be slowed down for face-saving purposes, if nothing else.

As with most ideologically-driven enterprises, not only have the wheels come completely off the first parry of the grand plan, the dominos are most assuredly now falling in quite the opposite direction as intended. My only thought as to why the neocons thought so little of the Shia is because they had been dominated (in Iraq) for 1200 years by a Sunni minority, but they perhaps should have looked around the neighborhood a bit to see where this concept of “spreading Democracy”, (a backup rationale, though it was) would inevitably lead. With Iran as a firm anchor to the east, and a now-aroused Shia majority in Lebanon, the westernmost country of the Middle East, and nothing but Shia majorities in between, it is patently clear that the American adventures in the oil patch have indeed backfired colossally. The Zionist dream to subjugate the entire area is now in tatters because everyone outside the US and Israel can easily see that the Anglo-Israeli bluff has been called, and nothing short of all-out nuclear warfare, which, given the lad with his finger on the big trigger cannot be ruled out, will stand in the way of the completion of the neocons greatest nightmare: an awakened Shia giant amidst the surrounding US supported dictatorships that will lead, sooner or later, to collapse from within each client state.

Let us count the reasons for this prediction:

The US has been shown to be a paper tiger militarily by a few thousand “dead-enders” in the Sunni triangle. Sure, the US military can level cities and massacre tens of thousands of non-combatants, but they have failed miserably to combat the element of the resistance that keeps it growing, and becoming, in the process, ever more successful. The neocons have blundered into a trap from which there is no viable exit without a massive meal of crow, a taste for which this crew has shown little appetite. The countdown has begun to the day a legitimate Iraqi government dominated by the Shias will politely ask the Americans to leave and take their bases with them. Once again, the specter of a Sunni/Shia alliance with regard to the resistance would be too compelling to ignore. Thus, the Iranians know that there will be no general invasion of their homeland as long as their man in Iraq has the bulk of the US military locked down using their long-time Sunni foes as the enforcers. The irony resonates on so many levels, I suspect historians of the future will have a difficult time suppressing a laugh or two as they contemplate the official beginning of the end of the American Empire.

The US is broke, and using the sentiment of the population as a gauge, has only Israel to count on. This is a little like Dad counting on his kids when he goes broke betting it all at the track. The number of actors who are able to begin the US dollar panic are hard to fully account for when one considers that Warren Buffet has made close to two billion in profits betting against the viability of that currency, with great regret, of course. With an eroding industrial base, lagging agricultural output, and an insatiable consumer beast, the country is completely at the mercy of foreigners to sustain the illusion of a wealthy, and economically healthy, US. They will do this only as long as it takes to reduce their exposure to a vanishing dollar, which most central banks are quietly doing as I write. The Chinese are not-so-quietly turning their massive stockpile of US dollar based assets into commodities such as Canadian mining and energy firms. It will be only be too clear when the time has come for foreigners to pull the plug on the credit-addicted US government and their equally leveraged citizenry . . . when the prop of having its currency being the world reserve standard collapses under the pressure of free-market traders who know a thing or two about supply and demand. Many European houses no longer deal in US dollars at any exchange rate whatsoever!

As the dollar sinks, the price of oil will begin to affect ever-greater swaths of the US economy, and its legions of energy hungry SUV owners. While oil company shills who popped up after 911 like mushrooms after a rain are shrilly promoting the “Peak Oil” hoax to explain the crushing rise in energy costs, the reality is that the only thing that has peaked is cheap oil, and recovery costs are irrelevant to this equation. The simple fact is that the US and Britain have been using bribes and gun barrels to subsidize the cost of oil. When the Shia revolution set in motion by the neocons spreads throughout the Middle East, tinhorn dictators from Kuwait to Qatar will escape with whatever they can steal to the west in the face of unrelenting pressure from their long-dominated subjects. At that point, oil will be priced to the advantage of the seller, as opposed to the buyer. How humorous it will be for the oil-rich countries to impose their own version of an oil-depletion allowance. At that point, the American public will either go gently into that fascist good night, or stage a little rebellion of their own. For this question, I demure from a prediction.

The alliance of Europe, Russia, China, India, Brazil and Venezuela that has become a reality gives the lie to the myth of the US role as sole superpower. It is a fool who thinks that the US can forcibly dictate to the combined economic and military power of that global, anti-US bloc. The sad fact is that it really didn’t have to be this way, but neocon arrogance once again undercut the old reliable divide-and-conquer strategy the US has counted on to keep these kinds of alliances from congealing. Now that Pandora’s box is open, I suspect the US will be subject to some rather harsh repayments for the derring-do of the CIA, WTO, US Military and countless other agencies of humiliation. No doubt the neocons will blame it all on Bill Clinton, who of course, is a neocon himself.

While I could follow this trail seemingly indefinitely, I’ll force myself to place a capstone on my diatribe. Recalling the third entry of this roster that predicted a sharp downturn or even complete collapse of the US economy, American arrogance will vanish into a real cat fight of recrimination in an attempt to establish how it all went so very wrong. It is doubtful that the commission to rule on this matter will be as biased as those presided over by Earl Warren and Thomas Keen, and will have little trouble tracing the trail of disaster back to it’s architects. Those readers keen of wit and with a little recent history under their belts will quite likely shout: the neocons! The neocons, indeed, and they left a pile of evidence that they proudly published for all to see. But exhibit 1A out of thousands to follow will be sufficient to damn them, and it is the manifesto of the neocon snake-nest known as the Project For A New American Century, a document lovingly entitled “Rebuilding America’s Defenses”.

On the face of it, it is very difficult to understand how the world’s sole superpower would need to rebuild its defenses, particularly since they have never been used for anything but offensive actions. A group which describes itself as: “a non-profit educational organization dedicated to a few fundamental propositions: that American leadership is good both for America and for the world; that such leadership requires military strength, diplomatic energy and commitment to moral principle; and that too few political leaders today are making the case for global leadership” fairly reeks of arrogance at the get-go. But the pride of their fleet of publications mentioned above is almost comical in its school-marmish attitude. I believe their real intent is best understood if one were to substitute the word “domination” for “leadership” in the above quote, because even a (painful) perusal of the noted document shows this to be the real goal. Rather than examine the whole treatise point by point, I will merely suggest that only irrational people drunk on their own arrogance could think that the rest of the world would just stand by and let the American Empire overwhelm them.

My greater purpose in the context of this entry is to find the ever-popular “smoking gun” regarding the precise point where push came to shove with regard to the implementation of their hallucinations as Official American Foreign Policy. In one of their few moments of lucidity, they realized that it was sounding all too Empire-esque and Americans, of course well known for their revulsion of being seen as global bullies, would not happily send troops and treasure around the world as a means of demonstrating “leadership”. And so they pivoted the entire scheme on one requirement provocatively called “a new Pearl Harbor”. That document was published in September of 2000. In January of 2001, many of the authors and project members infused the corridors of power at the invitation of the recently selected president, George W. Bush. 10 months later, their most fervent wish, the fulcrum of their entire agenda magically happened. It is a testament to the woeful state of the average American’s attention span, not to mention basic powers of deduction, thanks both to Federalized “education” and corporate dominated media, that a connection of these rather obvious dots have been made by only a relative handful of the public. The first three steel-and-concrete buildings in history collapse due to “fire”, one of which was not even damaged by an aircraft collision, and the vast majority of Americans are not even curious! There’s no need to laundry-list the anomalies, contradictions, gross impossibilities, and sheer implausibility of the Official Legend of the events surrounding the advent of the “new Pearl Harbor” — others, notably David McGowan (davesweb@cnchost.com), have sifted through the bullshit sufficiently that reinventing the wheel is not required.

But the point for our purposes here is that someday, sooner or later, the lid will get blown off this scam as just another false flag black op to entice Americans to ditch decades of diplomacy and follow the lead of that notable experiment called Nazi Germany into unprovoked, unilateral attacks on sovereign nations in the interests of the power elite. Only the incurious among us have failed to learn that the namesake event for 911 was itself an entirely avoidable incident which was used to leverage a reluctant American public into supporting yet another foreign adventure called World War II. And while that “noble” effort is steeped in myth, the facts clearly show the open-minded observer that rather than being a containment of Fascism, it was rather intended as a defeat of the Soviet Union and any other left-leaning nation. It was the Soviets that whipped the Nazi’s, a conclusion illustrated by the fact that they took more casualties in the Battle of Stalingrad than the entire Allied coalition combined for the duration of the war! So far, the sentiment, nay nostalgia exemplified by the “our Government wouldn’t do that to its own people” argument that is the last stand for the head-in-the-sand crowd has prevailed. What happens when they realize what fools they’ve been played for? Again, no prediction from this prognosticator.

finis

While I recognize that the preceding article takes a wide turn to get us back to nine-eleven, recall that this is the context entry, the part that attempts to make some sense, no matter how perverse, out of the bizarre world we seemingly entered on Black Tuesday. I believe the key to this whole enigma is found in my reply to Dr. Reynolds;

The Zionist cabal of one-worlders believes itself to be in full control at this point, and the only real opening we have is to expose them as mass murderers who will stop at nothing to fulfill their obscene greed and lust for power.

The reason they went to so little trouble to come up with even a slightly believable cover story is that they don’t even care if they get found out. They threw down the gauntlet and in effect said: so what are you gonna do about it, vote? Well we all know how much good that will do us, so it looks like crunch time is in the offing. They’ve got their hideous PATRIOT Act, and all that really stands between us and the last days of the World As We Know It is the military. The oath they took was to the Constitution, not the preservation of an elite regime, so will enough of them recognize this truth and round up the scoundrels? Only time will tell.

Saturday, May 14, 2005

Piece, the Third; Phony Arabs

So far, we have clearly established motive, using both an historical context and a particular nexus involving the Israeli-Americans infesting the highest reaches of the illegal Administration of the bushbrain. They left a very clear record of their intent. We have also shown categorically that plenty of people knew beforehand what the intentions of these madmen were and cashed in on it. While I tend to go with the Israeli citizens-dunnit, even if that is refuted, we know it wasn’t Arabs. And now the issue of means takes center stage in the form of a questioner, and on one side we have al CIAduh representing the Arabs, and on the other, assorted Mossad/CIA/MI5 assets. Behind the furtive-acting Arabs is a large poster of bin Laden, and behind the spooks, a huge photo of Cheney and Sharon looking lovingly at one another in front of an Israeli flag.

A small digression is in order at this juncture, however. This background is the key to the operational part of the set-up of the fictional Arab flight students, who are all no doubt in Israel, or other foreign lands stirring up more trouble. This is quoted from someone who prefers to remain anonymous, and I suspect that he or she is a deep insider, or at least once was, and has too much to lose by going public. But the facts should speak for themselves. (I will post a link to the whole article when I find out where it is lurking.)

“ In February of 2000, Indian intelligence officials detained 11 members of what they thought was an Al Qaeda hijacking conspiracy. It was then discovered that these 11 "Muslim preachers" were all Israeli nationals! India’s leading weekly magazine, The Week, reported:

On January 12 Indian intelligence officials in Calcutta detained 11 foreign nationals for interrogation before they were to board a Dhaka-bound Bangladesh Biman flight. They were detained on the suspicion of being hijackers. "But we realized that they were tabliqis (Islamic preachers), so we let them go", said an Intelligence official.


The eleven had Israeli passports but were believed to be Afghan nationals who had spent a while in Iran. Indian intelligence officials, too, were surprised by the nationality profile of the eleven. "They say that they have been on tabligh (preaching Islam) in India for two months. But they are Israeli nationals from the West Bank," said a Central Intelligence official. He claimed that Tel Aviv "exerted considerable pressure" on Delhi to secure their release. "It appeared that they could be working for a sensitive organization in Israel and were on a mission to Bangladesh," the official said. 29 (emphasis added.)

What were these 11 Israelis doing trying to impersonate Al Qaeda men? Infiltrating?...perhaps. Framing?...more likely. But the important precedent to understand is this: Israeli agents were once caught red handed impersonating Muslim hijackers!

This event becomes even more mind boggling when we learn that it was Indian Intelligence that helped the US to so quickly identify the "19 hijackers"! On April 3, 2002, Express India, quoting the Press Trust of India, revealed:

Washington, April 3: Indian intelligence agencies helped the US to identify the hijackers who carried out the deadly September 11 terrorist attacks in New York and Washington, a media report said here on Wednesday. 30


Ain't that a kick in the ass?!! Did you catch that? The Indian intelligence officials that were duped into mistaking Israeli agents for Al Qaeda hijackers back in 2000, were the very same clowns telling the FBI who it was that hijacked the 9-11 planes! Keep in mind that Indian intelligence has an extremely close working relationship with Israel’s Mossad because both governments hate the Muslim nation of Pakistan. 31

The clear implication of this of course, is that those furtive fellows in the robes on the left are probably Mossad agents, and ones just like them were the “Arabs” that went around the country using stolen passports establishing a trail a mile wide pointing to men with Arab names! This theory is clearly supported by the following further excerpt:

“The London Daily Telegraph reported on September 16, 2001:

"The Telegraph has learned that two senior experts with Mossad, the Israeli military intelligence service, were sent to Washington in August to alert the FBI and CIA to the existence of a cell of as many as 200 terrorists said to be preparing a big operation. They had no specific information about what was being planned but linked the plot to Osama Bin Laden and told American officials that there were strong grounds for suspecting Iraqi involvement."


Do you smell a "false flag" operation in the works? How is possible that the Mossad knew of the existence of these 200 terrorists but could not name or locate a single one? And how convenient for Israel that Saddam Hussein should be in cahoots with Osama Bin Laden, despite the fact that Bin Laden and Hussein hate each other!”

Don’t those guys in black think of everything? I mean they figured out how to serve up an excuse to take out Israel’s worst enemy and to open the way for US interests to wrest the Afghan pipeline deal from their competitors, without a bid, of course. Israel would settle for a restoration of a pipeline from the Arab oil fields through Jordan to Haifa, as they enjoyed in the days of the Shah of Iran, yet another CIA plant.

Now back to our fictive 911 Game Show, as it were. But just for the sake of a useful comparison, lets whisk the Israeli agents in robes off the stage and replace them with the real thing, such as the men whose identities were stolen and claimed to be the hijackers who perished in carrying out their operation noir. We see here that they are clearly alive, and that the official narrative has not been amended to reflect that fact.

The idea of hijacking two flights out of Boston to hit targets in NYC is clearly ludicrous when one realizes US airspace; particularly in the Northeastern corridors are by far the most heavily guarded flight lines in the world. The number of Mach speed capable fighters set to scramble at any given hour in sprinting range of the carefully calculated flight path is no doubt well into three figures — but only one would be required to deal with each hijacked aircraft. These aren’t very smart odds for people who are supposedly fiendishly brilliant. Consider the proximity of JFK and LaGuardia to the targets, and the odds improve dramatically.

Let us return to anonymous to recount the startling gap between the routine performances, (over 100 times per year, on average) of NORAD on any given day to that of nine-eleven.

“On October 26, 1999, the famous golfer Payne Stewart boarded a private Learjet in Florida and left for Texas. Shortly after takeoff, Stewart's jet veered sharply off course and began heading northwest. All contact with air controllers was lost. Within 15 minutes of having gone off course, US fighter jets had already intercepted the jet. Everyone on board was likely dead due to depressurization. These fighter jets were dispatched by NORAD, the branch of the US air force whose job it is to monitor and defend US airspace 24 hours a day. NORAD maintains a huge array of land-based radar systems, and has fighter jets on alert 24 hours a day so that they can respond to a crisis. The jets escorted the doomed airplane until another group of Air National Guard jets took over the escort mission. Finally, Stewart's jet ran out of fuel a crashed in South Dakota. The quick reaction time and military precision with which NORAD intercepted and escorted Stewart's jet was impressive, and exactly what one would have expected from the greatest military power in world history. 41

But on 9-11, the same NORAD which had so effortlessly intercepted Stewart's jet in 1999, was nowhere to be found during that two hour period between the first planes going off course and the last one crashing in a Pennsylvania field! How is it possible that the airspace between Boston and Washington DC, an area which contains the political and economic heart of the nation, was left completely defenseless? The second plane to hit the New York had flown off course without communication for 40 minutes. On its way to New York, it actually flew within a few miles of McGuire Air Force base in New Jersey, after the first tower had already been hit!

And how is it possible that Washington DC was left undefended (long after the New York attacks) when Andrews Air Force base is within car driving distance?

The air force jets which did finally arrive were too late. Was this due to NORAD's incompetence, or was the order to scramble the fighter jets deliberately delayed so that the terror attacks could take place. Given NORAD's impressive performance in the 1999 Payne Stewart disaster, this would suggest that someone high up in the Air Force establishment may have issued stand down orders to some of our Air Force bases. Remember, the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board is headed by Zionist Richard Perle and his gang of warmongering lackeys. 42 The civilians on this board wield the power to promote career minded Generals and Admirals. Is it really that hard to believe that a highly placed military leader could have collaborated with the true 9-11 planners?

What makes the Air Force's slow response even more outrageous and suspicious is that previously mentioned Newsweek article which revealed that several Pentagon leaders (Defense Policy Board?) cancelled flight plans for September 11 due to security concerns. 43 There were other warning signals too which we’re reviewed earlier. In light of all these warnings, why wasn’t NORAD and it's armada of fighters placed on an even higher alert than they already are? There is only one logical answer to these questions: Certain Pentagon leaders were "in on it".

General Hamid Gul, a former Director of Pakistani Intelligence, hit the nail on the head with his analysis:

"The attacks against New York and Washington were Israeli engineered."

"The attacks started at 8:45, and four flights are diverted from their assigned air space and no Air Force fighter jets scramble until 10:00. Radars are jammed, transponders fail and no IFF - friend or foe identification - challenge. In Pakistan, if there is no response to an IFF, jets are instantly scrambled. This was clearly an inside job. Will this also be hushed up in the investigation, like the Kennedy assassination?" 44


This raises another troubling set of questions. Surely the masterminds of the 9-11 operation would have taken the time to learn something about US air defense procedures. They would therefore have realized that hitting New York City with jets hijacked from Boston would have been difficult. New York is about 30 minutes away by airplane, and jumbo jets fly very slowly when compared to US fighter jets that can crack the sound barrier. Even with a 15-20 minute head start, NORAD's jets could have easily intercepted them, especially the second plane, which took a longer route to New York and flew way off course for 40 minutes. Why choose Boston's airport and jeopardize the success of the operation? Wouldn't it be safer to just hijack planes from New York's Kennedy or La Guardia Airports? Or even Newark, NJ which is just across the river? Any plane hijacked from either of those three busy airports would have been unstoppable. Even a plane from Philadelphia's Airport would have been much closer to the target than far away Boston.

The planners were no dummies. They must have counted on receiving protective cover and a window of opportunity by someone high up at US Air command. Why else choose Boston?

In addition to the protection that the planners were to receive from certain Air Force elements, there is another plausible theory for choosing Boston's Logan Airport as well as United and American Airlines planes. It should be noted that the firm which provides security at Boston's Logan Airport and also Newark Airport, and also works extensively with United and American Airlines, is a company called Huntleigh USA. 45 Claiming that Huntleigh USA's airport security was grossly negligent on 9-11, family members of some of the victims are suing Huntleigh. 46 Huntleigh USA had been acquired by ICTS International in 1999. ICTS is controlled by two Israelis; Ezra Harel and Menachem Atzmon. 47 In short, security at Boston's Logan airport was handled (or mishandled) by an Israeli controlled company.

So I now ask for a vote on the following questions: between the Arabs and the Israeli-US nexus who had the greater access to the kind of power to allow all of these incredible things to happen?

1. To get an agent, or agents, aboard the flights without corresponding names on the flight manifests.

2. To have access to enough control over NORAD to assure that fighters would not be scrambled in time to abort the operation.

3. To have the actions, or rather inactions, of the FAA and NORAD “investigated” and found to be negligent, but for no individuals to be fired or even reprimanded.

Later, and I mean much later, we get some semi-official information that states that the real reason for these failures were because the FAA and NORAD were confused by the fact that five different terrorist/war drills were transpiring on the very morning of nine-eleven. Their implication is that bin Laden and the boys used the exercises as cover…but how did they find out about them? This fallback is reminiscent of the roll back of excuses for invading in a most Naziesque way, Afghanistan and Iraq, both planned well before nine-eleven, an unimpeachable fact that has been widely reported by insiders. It’s a long way from “mushroom clouds over an American city” to “liberating the Iraqis”.

Friday, May 13, 2005

Piece, the Second; The Mysterious “Put” Options

Precisely what is mysterious, and I believe agonizingly telling is that this is still a mystery at all. In fact, if you have access to one of several databases, a few strokes of the keys would reveal all. But it takes a hefty security clearance to get in there, and so far those who have done so are not saying a word.

For the uninitiated, a “put” option is a reverse investment, so to speak, in that the bet is that the share price will drop! These are considered rather risky in the stock trade, but if one knows something very bad is going to happen to, say, American Airlines, and this “investor” was a conscienceless bottom-dweller, one would not call the authorities, but would place put options on the stock. Well, it is now pretty certain that not only is the bottom of the barrel swarming with odious creatures, but that the bunch that placed very heavy put options on a list of 38 stocks in the three days preceding nine-eleven have been found to be Israeli citizens.

While there is the obvious finger of foreknowledge pointing at whoever these, as yet unrevealed Israeli citizens are, there is an even more frightening aspect to consider. A variety of alphabet agencies concerned with intelligence and stock fraud constantly monitor share trading worldwide to ferret out unusual bursts of trades that would point to, say, a terrorist attack. A careful reading of the linked article shows that these activities, like US air defenses, are not seat-of-the-pants operations. They have rigid guidelines for what to look for and when and how to react.

So bells had to be ringing as the sophisticated PROMIS software detected and revealed these unexplainable trades, but nothing happened! Worse, when investigations were launched after the fact, we are told little of substance other than the nationality of the buzzards, and that “most of these transactions were handled primarily by Deutsche Bank-A.B.Brown, a firm which until 1998 was chaired by A. B."Buzzy" Krongard, who later became executive director of the CIA.”

Well, these aren’t paltry pieces of information, but the fact that these matters fell off the msm radar as soon as the trades could not be linked to Arabs, in general, or al CIAduh, in specific is heavily symptomatic of a much larger pattern of deception. Then later, when a most reluctant WH “allowed” a 911 commission to form, what did those tireless sleuths uncover regarding these trades?

“The Kean Commission report, in attempting to dismiss these stories via its classic device of a footnote, concentrates solely on the spikes in put options on United Airlines and American Airlines in the week before the attacks. It states that the spike in sales of puts on one airline is attributable to the hedging strategy of an "institutional" trader with no visible connections to al-Qaeda; whereas the other spike resulted from a recommendation to sell short on airlines in a subscription-only fax newsletter. The report declines to wonder whether the writers of this unidentified newsletter may have received tips or information ultimately based on prior knowledge of the 9/11 attacks, and so the investigation apparently died there. The reasoning also seems to suggest that only al-Qaeda members could have advance knowledge of the attacks. The traders have no "conceivable connection al-Qaeda, hence it is impossible they had advance knowledge. (Of course, this rhetorical maneuver is much easier to pull off if the report simply ignores all of the other evidence of prior knowledge beyond the members of the network it identifies as al-Qaeda.)
There is no indication the Commission pursued reports that in the case of one trade, the buyer of put options left a $2.5 million profit uncollected for many weeks, with no report at this time as to whether it was ever collected.”

http://www.911truth.org

So put your heads together folks and plug it into the official narrative. Piece, the First was admittedly only context, but this item begins to strike at the heart of the beast we call nine-eleven.

Around the News Horn

I’ll have Piece the second up later today but first a wrap up, with commnentary, of course on my mad morning dash through the sites that will soon be posted in the nascent links section. I am always finding currents that transcend a single news event by weaving several together. Let us commence with taking up the Franklin/AIPAC case. Upon being asked about the case against Franklin:

“… special agent Catherine Hanna said, "The information Franklin disclosed relating to potential attacks upon U.S. forces in Iraq could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign country."

The damage, she said, could arise from "jeopardizing the viability of the sources and methods." The information was from a document classified as "top secret," Hanna said.”

Now go back and read Xymphora’s take on the investigation and I think Agent Hanna gave enormous credence to what even I had a hard time digesting at first. War by deception, indeed.

Then from the prolific fingers of our man at antiwar.com, Senor Raimondo, we find this today:

“The neocons' comeuppance is imminent, or so we hope. How many investigations are even now tracing their treason? The battering of Bolton is just a warm-up for the main event. As the new Pope put it in an address on the meaning of the Book of Revelation in the Bible:

"'History, in fact, is not in the hands of dark forces, left to chance or just human choices,' he told thousands of people in St. Peter's Square. 'Above the unleashing of evil energy, above the vehement interruptions of Satan, above the so many scourges of evil, rises the Lord, supreme arbiter of history.'"

Against the everyday horrors unfolding in Iraq – and on the floor of the U.S. Congress – we have some hope that the power of evil is limited. Lately, we can bring ourselves to imagine that it can be pushed back and eventually defeated – even as we remember that evil isn't the norm, and that before Sept. 11, 2001, it was in retreat.”

Evil in retreat before nine-eleven? Obviously Justin is a devout Papist, as he eulogized the reactionary Paul II even as he prepared to lay down before the former Nazi Youther, Benedict the one too many. But I don’t mean to bash either Justin or Catholics, merely to point out the discrepancy between what they claim, and what they do.

The most glaring problem with this is that he is buying right into the bushbrain’s black or white, good versus evil dichotomy. The folly of this line is that they presume some vile fellow that lives in the fiery below is needed to explain the venality of humans, who have left a sufficient track record of dastardly deeds without any help whatsoever from a horned one.

As Irony would have it, the ones who claim the greatest fealty to all that is good are far too often using the charade to mask the darker reality beneath. For the proof in this pudding, check in with the great Chris Floyd in his expose of the bushbrain’s bro’, and heir apparent to the throne, old Jebbie. Be forewarned, have a barf bag handy because witnessing a collision of self-proclaimed godliness while using all the forces of the state to wreak havoc and misery on those without six-figure incomes.

Now for a quick horn toot. Consider this astonishing news from Gareth Porter:

“Even as the Bush administration was hailing the heroism of the Iraqi Shi'ite majority for going to the polls last Jan. 30, it was secretly preventing the new Shi'ite government from having full control over its own intelligence services. The reason, it has now been revealed, is that the administration fears that the Shi'ites will be too friendly with Iran.”

On January 30, 2003, I posted this commentary. Then, a month or so ago I updated it, and was not forced to alter either the theme or the details of the predictive part of the piece, and thus emboldened, leapt out to new realms of augury posted by the kind editors at Axis of Logic. I won’t waste any time paraphrasing these pieces, but they are intimately related to the above revelation.

Thursday, May 12, 2005

Nine-Eleven in Five Easy Pieces

Piece, the First

Now get to the really good stuff – or, actually painful would be more like it. But since context is everything, let us begin at the nominal beginning. War is an addiction in many ways, but big capital is fiendishly hooked on it. They usually play both sides and get the proceeds of the cost of the conflict, and then feast on the contracts to rebuild what they have just gotten rich while destroying. Iraq, of course, is an obvious case in point. But how does a regime get ordinary people to pay for, and die in these profit-making schemes? Let us turn to a master at the trade.

“Why of course the people don’t want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don’t want war: neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship…Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger.”

Hermann Goering, at the Nuremberg Trials before he was sentenced to death

Telling a people that they have been attacked though it was stage managed by internal forces is known as a false flag operation, and is an ancient state ritual. Goering only refined the tactic somewhat. For the Nazis it was the Reichstag fire, supposedly set by a communist, but later shown to have been the work of the SS using an access tunnel from Herr Goering’s office. For Lyndon Johnson, it was the Gulf of Tonkin incident. It can plausibly be argued that there has never been a war that did not result from such a fraudulent claim upon the desired enemy, most of them utterly without either motive or means, or both, to stage such an attack.

The evidence that the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq were planned long before September 11, 2001 is so widespread, it can even be found in the books of former insiders of the Bush Administration. More ominously, the call for those unprovoked invasions, and many to follow, were made by an outfit called the Project for a New American Century that is composed of the jolly gentlemen known as neocons that have been nested around the bushbrain since he was appointed God, or at least his emissary here on earth. They lamented in a document called Rebuilding America’s Defenses that there would be little enthusiasm among us ordinary folk for such an expensive and deadly enterprise, unless a tragedy on the scale of Pearl Harbor provoked us to demand revenge.

This is very telling since it has been rather conclusively shown that the original Pearl Harbor was itself an entirely avoidable event, provoked and facilitated by FDR to get the US into WWII. In the case of the “attacks” on the WTC and the Pentagon, the enemy du jour had to be helped along, as this was not a very sophisticated crowd such as the well equipped Japanese. In fact, they didn’t have to lift a finger. The PNAC boys were so eager for their wars and empire building projects, they called on their good friends in the Israeli and US intelligence communities to make it all happen. And happen, it did.

So piece number one is a bunch of Zionists and oil barons infesting the NSA and Defense Department that have multiple motives for inciting a war against several Muslim countries, and perhaps the only people on earth with the means to pull it off. And they had the audacity to publish it, knowing that Americans are so cowed by the image of the almighty Federal Government that few would ever even question such a striking coincidence. Of course, it helps when they knew they could count on the press to play their part in whole charade, and the cover-up that followed.

Xymphora speaks

This piece from the ever-fascinating keyboard of a fellow blogger here at blogspot known as Xymphora has this to say, and I find it completely in character with all parties concerned.

"How do the insurgents always know when the Americans will show up? How did they know just what hotel room to fire at when Wolfowitz was in Baghdad? How do they know exactly when and where to deploy their improvised explosive devices so they are in place just before the Americans drive by?

Larry Franklin talked to the AIPAC dudes almost two years ago. What's the one thing he could have told them two years ago which would be still grievously affecting the ability of the American army to deal with the insurgency in Iraq? The Israelis are able to assist the insurgents because they know the details of the Saddam-era and post-Saddam-era American counterintelligence operations in Iraq. As the spies for the insurgency are able to avoid the American counterintelligence assets in Iraq (and may have even 'turned' some of them), the Americans have no way to root out those who are gathering information on American plans. The agents of the insurgency are able to consistently spy on the American occupying army, and know what the Americans are going to do before most of the Americans know. This explains why the insurgents are clearly winning.

Why would supposed American ally Israel want to help the insurgency, or at least part of it? Based on the ideas of Oded Yinon, the plan is to break Iraq up into small, unthreatening mini-states. The Israelis are trying to start an Iraqi civil war. To this end, the Israelis are hoping to pin the Americans in Iraq for as long as possible in a vain attempt to prevent this war. The Americans will only pull out when civil war is inevitable, which will be another huge embarrassment for the Pentagon. On top of that, the slow American defeat in Iraq, based on the perfidy of the Israelis in supporting the insurgency and undermining American counterintelligence in Iraq, is gradually destroying the American military (although no one in the Bush Administration will admit it). This effort means the Israelis are effectively currently engaged in war operations against the United States. This undeclared war by the greatest ingrate in the world, Israel - hundreds of billions of dollars in aid from American taxpayers to Israel, and this is the thanks they get! - has made the paleocons furious, and explains why the neocons have been unable to stop the AIPAC investigation."

We'll explore this avenue at a later date.

Greetings to all,

We begin day two of filboyz foray in cyberville with this exchange. The fellow that runs this site seems to be a very nice man and quite objective for a Zionist.

“Today's Haaretz carries the news that the political director of the Israeli Embassy in Washington will leave his post "for personal reasons":

Gilon_1

Naor Gilon (credit: Maarivintl.com)

Naor Gilon, the head of the political department at the Israeli Embassy in Washington, whose name has been linked to the Pentagon analyst charged with passing classified information to unauthorized personnel, will leave his post during the summer.

According to reports from Israel, Gilon is the Israeli representative who received classified information from two employees of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). The AIPAC officials allegedly received the information during conversations with Larry Franklin, the Pentagon analyst who was charged by the FBI on Wednesday.

Now, isn't that interesting? When the AIPAC spying scandal first broke last August, the Israeli political establishment swore on a stack of Bibles (Old Testament of course) that Israel would NEVER spy on the U.S. "We learned our lesson after Jonathan Pollard." "We're such close allies of the U.S. Why would we jeopardize such a trusting relationship by spying." And all of that turned out to be lies. Turns out, Gilon aided and abetted the AIPAC spies. Has Israel no shame?

Yes, of course all countries spy. In fact, spying is not always a bad thing. But for a country like Israel to engage in such idiotic risk-taking by damaging not just Israel's reputation, but those of the individuals involved and that of AIPAC (which in my opinion deserves every bit of the bad reputation it has earned in this case) seems ludicrous. In fact, it seems like exactly the type of reckless behavior that Israel seems to specialize in.

In fact, I believe that the Justice Department is letting AIPAC and the Israeli government off entirely too easily. I think they should either arrest Gilon (I guess they can't because of diplomatic immunity) or label him "persona non grata" immediately. Allowing him to stay here until the summer (as the article maintains) is worse than a slap on the wrist--it's a slap in the air that misses the victim entirely.

Just for the hell of it, let's go back in time to when the scandal first broke. Some of my posts from that period contain the following explanations and defenses from AIPAC, Israeli politicians and American Jewish leaders. I hope every single one of these people is mortified by their cupidity or lies:

Here's what one senior Likud pol said at the time:

...The Israeli government made a firm decision [after Pollard] to stop all clandestine spying in the United States, Yuval Steinitz, the chairman of the foreign and defense committee in Parliament, said Saturday."

This was a firm decision," Mr. Steinitz said, "and I'm 100 percent confident--not 99 percent, but 100 percent--that Israel is not spying in the United States. We have no agents there and we are not gathering intelligence there, unlike probably every other country in the world, including some of America's best friends in Europe."

And Israeli government lying continues as late as yesterday when, in response to news of Larry Franklin's arrest, Foreign Minister Sylvan Shalom stated baldly:

"Israel does not carry on any activity in the United States which could harm, God forbid, its closest ally," Shalom told Israel's Channel One TV.

Or how about this doozy from that choir boy of virtue, Natan Sharansky as quoted by CBS.com:

"There are absolutely no attempts to involve any member of the Jewish community and any general American citizens to spy for Israel against the United States," he said.

And these comments of his which were paraphrased by The Scotsman:

[Sharansky] claims that Israel had a spy in the Pentagon might have stemmed from internal US intelligence rivalry.

Talk about red herrings! It's interesting to note that the histrionic defense of AIPAC by Malcom Hoenlein a few months ago not only raised the specter of an anti-Semitic plot by the U.S. government against the organization; but also postulated that the entire case stemmed from interagency turf wars (CIA vs. Pentagon) and an attempt to embarrass Israel's hard-line neocon supporters in the Pentagon. How vivid an imagination Hoenlein has! And how in sync it is with Sharansky's. Isn't that a coincidence?

When Gilon's identity was first revealed last August, CBS.com noted:

The Israeli daily Maariv on Monday quoted Gilon as saying that he did nothing wrong. "My hands are clean. I have nothing to hide. I acted according to the regulations," Gilon said.

The diplomat told Maariv he was concerned that as a result of the reports, he won't be able to continue working in Washington. "Now, people will be scared to talk to me," the newspaper quoted him as saying.

The poor, hapless fellow. Just a deer caught in the FBI's headlights, right?”

The first part of my reply is in reference to some distasteful comments he received from people who should be sent to a library and not let out until they have learned something. I will return often to the themes initiated in this reply.

“Hello Richard,

I guess you're inured to the idiocy spewed by too many on topics on which they are clearly clueless, and so they toss in a spate of garbage to cover their ignorance. Of course, they're like children that think because they have their eyes covered, no one can see them. Our pathetic educational system and it's handmaiden the media have certainly lowered the common denominator.

As for Israeli spying, well this is to be understood in the context of the dependent stepchild who has been set up as a forward base at the doorstep of ALL THAT OIL. It is not a result of the loss of Jewish lives at the hands of the Nazi regime that Israel was formed, but as a result of the mighty lesson learned regarding the cruciality of oil to the projection of power.

I grow very tired of hearing about the "holocaust" as though those Jewish lives were any different that the twenty-five million Soviets who perished. At least they died defending themselves and doing us all a favor by trouncing the Nazis. It is this very conceit -- that Jews are somehow more important that anyone else -- that has caused members of your faith so much misery through the centuries. The maniacal belief in the chosen-ness of the Jews is the root cause of the misery that has been laid upon them.

And, just as a point of history. Most of today's Jewry are not related by genes to the original Hebrew tribe. Virtually all of European and Russian Jewry are descended from the Khazars, a Turkish tribe who ruled Ukraine from 600 CE to 850 or so. Their aristocracy adopted Judaism by default...they didn't want to challenge Rome or Constantinople by turning Christian, or Baghdad by going Muslim. As their power waned, they drifted into central Europe and Russia. This was all demonstrated originally by DNA testing.

None of this is to demean anything Jewish, as Christians are lost in the fog of their own specialness, as are members of most belief systems. Religion was invented to control people under the guise of morality. It has proved most flexible in reshaping itself to the changing demands of an evolving world. However, stealing land and murdering children does not speak well for Zion. Our Earth Mother has a long memory, and she particularly despises bullies.

Cheerio,

filboy”

Wednesday, May 11, 2005

Libertarians at Play

I briefly interrupt this program to throw up a quickie. As will be frequently seen, I will interrupt my ongoing narrative with tidbits from around the web, and instead of sending replies, I’ll simply post it all here.

Our first example of this technique will be to nod at the boys over at antiwar.com, Justin Raimondo and his pal Pat Buchanan, that hotbed of libertarian zeal. Actually, like all other “isms” and “arians” they get a lot right. But when the facts get in the way of their ideology, they happily stoop to what they darkly accuse their enemies in the neocon and Zionist camps of, the dreaded revisionism.

Today’s exercise will introduce to my eager readers a man of unusual logic, and a nearly inexhaustible passion for research on which to apply it. And, he’s a damn fine photographer in the bargain. Plus, he writes with a clarity and wit that I hope someday to achieve. His name is David McGowan, and I’ll refer to his work quite often as he has been a reliable guide into the darkest recesses of our brave new world, which is, of course neither brave or new, as he so eloquently illuminates.

Lets begin with a quote from yesterday’s offering from Raimondo. (By the way, I think he’d been watching too many foreign movies when he came up with his nom de guerre and staged that rather dramatic photo on his byline). In any case, in that article regarding the Bushbrain in Eastern Europe he states this:

“By entering the war at all, and opening up a ‘second front’ in the West – at the urging of American leftists and other friends of the Soviet Union – the U.S. saved the Bolsheviks from probable extinction at Hitler's hands.”

Hmmmm. Here’s McGowan’s take on that:

Myth #7: The opening of the Western Front was the event that turned the tide of the war and played an essential role in the defeat of Nazi Germany.
Not quite. By D-Day it was abundantly clear that Germany was facing near imminent defeat with or without us. By July of 1944, with the Allies yet to break out of their secure beachhead to form the Western Front, the USSR had reclaimed all its pre-war borders and made clear that it wasn't going to stop there.
Having been subjected to two massive invasions from the West in the preceding twenty-five years, they fully intended to create a permanent buffer zone and to fully dismantle the German war machine. Already, they had begun penetrations into Poland and Lithuania.
This was precisely the time when the aforementioned coup attempt was made that would have replaced Hitler. Knowing that Germany could not stop the Red Army from rolling on through Eastern Europe, the goal was to seek a negotiated peace by pasting a new face on the fascist regime.
US intelligence services were fully complicit in this attempt to preserve the Reich. America’s premier spymaster - Allen Dulles - working through his post as OSS chief in Bern, Switzerland, had brokered the deal with the Nazis. Dulles believed, correctly no doubt, that Western public opinion would not support a negotiated peace leaving Hitler in power.
At around this same time, Dulles was involved in other secret negotiations with the SS, dubbed Operation Sunrise, aimed at achieving a German surrender in northern Italy – which would have allowed the Allies to advance to the port city of Trieste. From there, Austria, Hungary and Yugoslavia could all have been quickly penetrated in advance of the Red Army.
Had the coup proven successful, that could conceivably have ended the war before the Western Front was even formed, and with Eastern Europe securely in Axis hands. It’s quite possible - indeed quite likely - that the USSR would have rejected this ‘peace.’ It is also possible that the Allies could have at that time joined with the Axis in waging war on the Soviets – who could have been painted as the aggressors for failing to accept the armistice.
But we will never know since the coup attempt failed, and five days later - on July 25 - the Allies broke out from their beachhead and the fabled Western Front was born. The Red army was at that time less than 100 miles from Warsaw and pushing on. Fully eighty percent of Germany’s troops were engaged on the Eastern Front.
The war in Europe would be over in just nine months. From there on out, it became essentially a race for Berlin, a race that the Allies on the Western Front would ultimately lose. Interrupting their westward push somewhat, the Soviets also sent troops in to occupy and fortify the Baltics, Romania, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, and Hungary.
The battle lines of the Cold War were being drawn – battle lines that would almost overnight see the United States and Britain embrace the European Axis powers of Italy and Germany as allies in opposition to their former ally in the east. Sound confusing? Not really. In truth, the Cold War battle lines weren’t so very different from the battle lines of World War II, or of World War I for that matter."

I urge all readers to click on your favorite bookstore and order the book from which this is excerpted, Understanding the F-Word; American Fascism and the Politics of Illusion. Clearing up all the disinformation spewed out in history classes from sea to shining sea can be hard work, but this one tome provides a counter-narrative that explodes a regiment of myths along with the one above.

Now for Pat’s turn, who needs no further introduction. The piece asks the grand question Was WWII Worth It?, and he goes on to state that what we got as a result of England’s declaration of war on Germany in defense of Poland was worse than if they had let the Nazis run amuck. After all, who ended up with Poland and all of Eastern Europe?

“It was Stalin, the most odious tyrant of the century. Where Hitler killed his millions, Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot, and Castro murdered their tens of millions.”

Now this is breathtaking, indeed. The clear implication is that somehow Stalin and the Soviets were the sole cause of the rise of that colorful cast of characters and is a leap of faith so grand as to leave one dizzy. Secondly, he is saying right out loud that Hitler wasn’t such a bad guy, after all. Hmmmmm. Since Hitler’s fame needs no embroidery here, let us turn instead to Joseph Stalin. This from McGowan’s fascinating website:

“[On March 5, 1953, Joseph Stalin died under conditions that "to this day are shrouded in mystery." Stalin, as I noted, had "held the rampant imperialism of the West largely in check for eight years following World War II." In August 1953, just five months after his death, the U.S. directed a bloody coup in Iran.]

And so began an endless series of bloody coups, rigged elections, and assassinations -- all aimed at bringing all of the world under the control of the West, even while Western leaders justified their actions with claims that it was the Soviet Union that had its sights set on world domination. Strangely though, Time had earlier admitted, in yet another Man of the Year offering (1942), that Stalin was "concentrat[ing] on building socialism in one state," and wanted "no new territories except at points needed to make Russia impregnable against invasion."
(http://www.time.com/time/special/moy/1942.html)

It is also interesting to note that, even in the midst of demonizing Stalin in an earlier Man of the Year offering (1939), Time begrudgingly admitted that after twelve years of his rule, "There were accounts of big dams built, large factories going up, widespread industrialization, big collective-farming projects. Five-Year plans were announced. Free schools and hospitals were erected everywhere. Illiteracy was on the way to being wiped out. There was no persecution of minorities as such. A universal eight-hour and then a seven-hour day prevailed. There were free hospitalization, free workers' summer colonies, etc."
(http://www.time.com/time/special/moy/1939.html)

That same MOY article also made a passing reference to "Soviet Russia's meticulously fostered reputation of a peace-loving, treaty-abiding nation," and noted that "Soviet Russia had definitely gained some measure of respect for its apparent righteousness in foreign affairs. It had supported against reactionary attacks popular governments in Hungary, Austria, China, Spain."

... It should go without saying that the excerpts from Time's two profiles of Stalin sound nothing like the dreaded "Stalinism" that we all love to hate. Instead, we find a peace-loving, treaty-abiding nation that consistently sides with the people to oppose fascist regimes, that offers free, quality education and healthcare for all, that has guaranteed worker protections, and that is known for racial tolerance.

Compare that with what we have now: a war mongering, outlaw nation that consistently backs brutal, fascistic regimes against the will of the people, that barely bothers to fund public education and that offers medical care only to those who can afford the exorbitant fees charged for such services, that has declared war on labor by invoking the Taft-Hartley Act under entirely contrived circumstances, and that could, shall we say, use a little work in the area of racial tolerance.

Now bear with me here, because I'm just thinking out loud, but it seems to me that 'Stalinism,' even as presented through the biased eyes of Time, would be a vast improvement over this fabulously 'free' and 'democratic' system that we now have. And it seems kind of funny to me, quite frankly, that we have all been taught to so thoroughly and universally despise the one man on the world stage who could honestly take credit for doing what the U.S. likes to pompously boast of: defeating the fascist powers of Europe.

Any reasonably honest reading of history reveals that it was the Red Army that crushed the Nazi war machine, with only nominal 'help' from the West coming late in the fourth quarter. And it was Joseph Stalin who commanded that Red Army. According to Time, Stalin put in sixteen-hour days personally directing the war effort, while living in a modest three-room apartment.

This may not be a 'politically correct' statement, but the world owes an incalculable debt of gratitude to Joseph Stalin for slaying the fascist beast -- or at least sending it underground until, in case you haven't noticed yet, it recently resurfaced.”

I’m not sure one can get any more politically incorrect than that, even at this late date.

The Grrrrlz

Okay, we got that out of the way and it didn't hurt a bit. And for sake of completion, Ingrid is the Airedale and Fanny, of course, would be the Irish. I will share along the way the many wonderful things I've learned about terriers in specific and dogs in general. But for now let me just say that if you love your dog, and you better, or I'll put the grrrrlz on ya, consider ditching commercial food and feed 'em what they evolved on...lots of meat and bone, some veggies, and vary the menu. Our base menu is cooked natural chicken (thighs works well because they're easy to bone and cheap), winter squash, and a small amount of buzzed up greens (parsley, chard and dandilion greens). Variations include raw chicken necks to keep the teeth clean, liver and eggs, and canned salmon. Yes, it is more expensive and takes a little more time, but when you factor in the savings on visits to the vet, I think it's a true no-brainer. Besides, when they get around other dogs who get the stale commercial poison, they get to go: "Na, na, na, na, na, we eat better than you do".

That out of the way, we can get back to saving the freaking world. Now, where was I? Oh yes, our drunken Uncle. Despite the fact that we were specifically told by the founders to avoid foreign entanglements, what have we done? Well, we let dear old Uncle get seduced by a bunch of foreign bankers and corporate jackals. Actually, jackals don't rape, pillage, murder and sell out their mother for a profit, so I apologise to that noble breed for comparing them to international bankers. Here I will insert a relevant quote:

"It would have been quite impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in past centuries ..."
- David Rockefeller, Bilderberg club permanent member, 1991 Baden-Baden, Germany

How is it relevant, you ask? Let us count the ways. First off, he started the statement by thanking the various luminaries of the (CIA controlled) American media for not subjecting them to the lights of publicity. That's precisely why I'm here pounding the keyboard and not composing a new song or writing something enjoyable, like a novel or a short story with a cool twist. Noooooooo, I have to get down into the trenches and start researching things like international banking conspiracies.

Arrrrgh, you shout: "Not another loony conspiracy nut." To that I say: go back and read the previous quote until you have committed it to memory.

Secondly, the world is not more sophisticated, it is merely more brainwashed. Thanks to our beloved educational system as wielded by our fiendish Uncle who fears an educated citizenry more than anything else, and the hog doo-doo that parades for entertainment provided by the Zionist clique in Horrorwood, sophisticated is the last descriptor I'd apply to the average modern zombie veering from one encounter of the consumer kind to another.

And last, hasn't this guy heard about leaving Surely out of all this? I mean, I know I'm just jumping in anticipation of being led by "
an intellectual elite and world bankers". Recall, please, that this gentleman is one of the foremost Zionists of our time. The "intellectual elite" to which he is refering are people like Wolfowitz, Perle, Feith, Wurmser, Henry the K, and so on as nauseum. Now let me be clear, here, and get this out of the way once and for all. To criticize the state of Israel, Zion, is not to criticize Jews...I am not anti-semetic, which is a ridiculous statement anyway; The Random House Dictionary of the English Language defines a semite as a member of ANY of various ancient or modern peoples originating in southwestern Asia, including the Akkadians, Cannanites, Phoenicians, Hebrews and Arabs.

What I am anti is a bunch of self-appointed world bankers and intellectual elite taking over from the various nations that have the temerity to autodetermine their destiny, and I don't give a damn what religion they claim. So there, take that Davey!


filboy Posted by Hello


Fanny in pink Posted by Hello


Ingrid in twilight Posted by Hello

Hello World!

Greetings to all and right off I'd like to thank my gracious hosts here at blogspot. Perhaps the first order of business is to explain my reasons for having the temerity to take up the full body contact sport of blogging. Like most who inhabit the blogosphere, I am frustrated by the Silence of the Lambs, which would, of course, be the mainstream media, hereafter msm, and that because we have now an alternative, those of us who have a predilection for reading and writing need to step up to the plate and make a few swings. I have spent the last three years staring at this tube and peering down the wire into worlds unknown to me previously, and I have interacted with it. Any article I read that I feel warrants a reply gets one if the author posts his or her contact. And I must say I have gotten many interesting responses in return, not to mention several new e-pals.

There has been an interesting progression of sites I regularly visit, and one of the things I noticed about that is how one can go from a daily to a rarely, then to a never at all. As I analyze the sites that have made the cycle, they have a commonality in that they never get outside the perimeter that they establish up front. Taking Josh Marshall as an example; notice how he is so hopelessly warped by the static contours of the Democratic Party, ever returning to the implication that if we would just elect more Democrats everything will be just fine. I have news for the boy . . . he's been in Washington way too long. It is pretty clear by now that there is only an illusory difference between the asses and the elephants, and the title of a 1998 book illustrates my point beautifully: Surrender; How The Clinton Administration Completed the Reagan Revolution. That business with Monica? Ha, that was a grand charade to make it seem like the elephants hated him. Nowadays, practically every picture of Clinton that appears has GHWB right at his side, and it looks like they're about to share a big hug, if not go French!

So we can dispense with politics as usual. At this point in time I believe two adages are worth trotting out; power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, and desperate times require desperate measures. That the Federal Government is now in possession of both the will and the means to force the twisted adgenda of an unelected psychopath down the throats of all persons and institutions , foreign or domestic, is proof of the first dictum. That that same Federal Government is running a vast con to finance their wholly unconstitutional forays into the soverignty of other nations and the rights we seem to be relinqushing daily is merely icing on the cake. The attacks both undertaken and planned are primarily to prop up this Ponzi scheme which is utterly dependent on oil being denominated in US dollars. When that support fails, our dear Uncle Sam will not be able to print dollars willy-nilly and have them float a ludicrous debt and spending spiral that has no precedence in history. Because the oil producing nations are largely in the thrall of Washington, they are forced to sell their precious ooze for dollars and then reinvest them in US assets to keep those dollars from collapsing. Saddam's great sin was to convert to Euros. Now one of his body doubles sits in a hoosgow while he lives in luxury in Riyadh, or someplace. Oh, you say, surely that's the real Saddam! Right. Then again, look at the teeth. They didn't even bother to fix the stand-ins peasant mouth to the standards of dentistry as practiced on the real thing. But the important thing here is that not only is Iran threatening to convert their considerable energy sales to Euros, they have the unmitigated gall to plan an alternative Bourse to those in New York and London.

So, yeah, we toppled Saddam for the oil and to protect the real powers that be in Washington, which is Israel, but the real reason is to maintain the dollar as the world reserve currency. If that goes, the US economy collapses and takes most of the world into a deep depression. So, the raging psychopaths are desperate to maintain the "lone superpower" illusion when the accountants could tell them we are stone broke, but neither is anyone asking, or listening to those bean counters in the "reality based community". Can you spell ENRON?

As for the second ditty, if this state of affairs doesn't qualify as desperate times, you've been watching too much reality TV and believing it's really real. Or weally weal, as a certain well-known broadcaster would say. Cutting to the chase, as I will ever endeavor to do, it's high time the states euthanize our derelict Uncle, and return to the days of a Jeffersonian system where the Federal Government is wholly dependent on the states, not individual citizens, for its revenue and its authority. We could just turn DC into a giant amusement park and all the federal buildings could be turned into to permanent exhibits on what not to allow the replacement government to do. I nominate someplace like Nome, Alaska or Death Valley, California for the new home of the national entity. That would guarantee a lean and mean Fed, you can be sure.

Okay, that will do for an introduction. I've got to go give my girls some nice, fresh chicken necks and have a little bite for my own howling mid-section. Oh, those aren't people girls, they're an Irish Terrier and an Airedale. When I get the hang of all the cool features of this software, you can be sure I'll post some photos of them, but I promise not to bore, okay?