9/11/06 Pentagon Missle comment

Rockefeller Admitted Elite Goal Of Microchipped Population

Hollywood director Russo goes in-depth for first time on the astounding admissions of Nick Rockefeller, including his prediction of 9/11 and the war on terror hoax, the Rockefeller's creation of women's lib, and the elite's ultimate plan for world population reduction and a microchipped society.

Food Network Subliminal Advertising?

I saw this on the news last night. Glitch? Mistake? Don't think so.

It's easy to see once you know it's there. But like in most cases, you won't see something unless your looking for it.

Triumph- Earth to America

Even a dog can hand these guys their asses.

Senate Committee Repudiates Bush on Iraq

Senate Committee Repudiates Bush on Iraq
By DAVID ESPO,
AP Special Correspondent


WASHINGTON - In a calculated snub of President Bush, the Democratic-controlled Senate Foreign Relations Committee dismissed plans for a troop buildup in Iraq on Wednesday as "not in the national interest" of the United States.

"The president has made his decision," Vice President Dick Cheney fired back, a response that made it clear the administration would go ahead anyway. "We need to get the job done."


What?! They can't ignore Congress. When are these guy's going to start wearing crowns?

Bill O'Reilly on The Colbert Report

Great Parents...Not!!!!!!

Rumsfeld's Pentagon Photo Op

From Killtown on the Loose Change Forum.

There was a good post at ATS by an ex-army guy recently that spelled it out better than I did that Rummy's photo op in front of the Pentagon after it got hit strongly suggests he knew the full extent of the attacks:


QUOTE
bledforit
posted on 29-12-2006

Here's my question, I remember very well the events on 9/11. I was at work in Maryland and watched for hours and hours straight as the events unfolded, I tuned in on TV just after the first plane struck the tower. I remember back in high school learning about the structure of government and how safeguards were built in allowing for continuity of our political structure, later in the Army I learned more about how our government protects it's leaders.

SO, on Sept. 11th, why did I see SecDEF. Donald Rumsfeld helping to carry out wounded people at the Pentagon, If we were truly under attack no one could know what would happen or how long it would last, perhaps the airplanes were only the first wave. My point is from the President on down everyone would have gone to ground in bunkers until it was assured that the threat had passed, But there was Rumsfeld, in front of the cameras with a neatly pressed suit on right after the Pentagon attacks on the lawn with the fire behind him. Is this because he and the Government NEW the extant of the attacks and knew they were completely overwith?

This little question has nagged me since that day, I love my country, I have been in combat and bled for it, but I know the government isn't perfect and they do lie. Once in Bosnia we were locked down for two days because someone blew up a market, and yet here is the largest attack since Pearl Harbor and top officials are outside running around? I look forward to some of the really detail oriented people hear helping me nail this down, thank you.


Here is video of Rumsfeld during his photo op:




If it was truly an outside terrorist attack, Rummy would be down in the bunkers, NOT outside helping people.

Rummy outside also gives him an excuse why the shoot down orders were not approved early since he changed the rules in June '01 so that he has final approval. Kind of hard to approve shoot downs when you are out carrying stretchers, huh?

I think that pretty much says it.

Congress to Send Critics to Jail

Congress to Send Critics to Jail, Says Richard Viguerie

PR Newswire
Wednesday, January 17, 2007

The following is a statement by Richard A. Viguerie, Chairman of GrassrootsFreedom.com, regarding legislation currently being considered by Congress to regulate grassroots communications:

"In what sounds like a comedy sketch from Jon Stewart's Daily Show, but isn't, the U. S. Senate would impose criminal penalties, even jail time, on grassroots causes and citizens who criticize Congress.

"Section 220 of S. 1, the lobbying reform bill currently before the Senate, would require grassroots causes, even bloggers, who communicate to 500 or more members of the public on policy matters, to register and report quarterly to Congress the same as the big K Street lobbyists. Section 220 would amend existing lobbying reporting law by creating the most expansive intrusion on First Amendment rights ever.

For the first time in history, critics of Congress will need to register and report with Congress itself.

"The bill would require reporting of 'paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying,' but defines 'paid' merely as communications to 500 or more members of the public, with no other qualifiers.

"On January 9, the Senate passed Amendment 7 to S. 1, to create criminal penalties, including up to one year in jail, if someone 'knowingly and willingly fails to file or report.'

"That amendment was introduced by Senator David Vitter (R-LA). Senator Vitter, however, is now a co-sponsor of Amendment 20 by Senator Robert Bennett (R-UT) to remove Section 220 from the bill. Unless Amendment 20 succeeds, the Senate will have criminalized the exercise of First Amendment rights. We'd be living under totalitarianism, not democracy.

"I started GrassrootsFreedom.com to fight efforts to silence the grassroots. The website provides updates in the legislation and has a petition to sign opposing Section 220.

"Thousands of nonprofit leaders, bloggers, and other citizens have hammered the Senate with calls in opposition to Section 220, which seeks to silence the grassroots. The criminal provisions will scare citizens into silence.

"The legislation regulates small, legitimate nonprofits, bloggers, and individuals, but creates loopholes for corporations, unions, and large membership organizations that would be able to spend literally hundreds of millions of dollars, yet not report.

"Congress is trying to blame the grassroots, which are American citizens engaging in their First Amendment rights, for Washington's internal corruption problems."

CONTACT: Mark Fitzgibbons, +1-703-392-7676 or +1-703-408-3775, for
GrassrootsFreedom.com.

The Very Bad Idea, Part Two!

Click image to enlarge.

War On Everything

Not much to say about this but God help us all.

9/11 Misderection

You have got to watch this.

This Modern World

Click to enlarge.

FAA Managers Destroyed 9/11 Tape

Thanks to Patriot from the Loose Change forum for finding this.

Recording Contained Accounts of Communications With Hijacked Planes

By Sara Kehaulani Goo
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, May 6, 2004; 6:16 PM

Six air traffic controllers provided accounts of their communications with hijacked planes on Sept. 11, 2001, on a tape recording that was later destroyed by Federal Aviation Administration managers, according to a government investigative report issued today.

It is unclear what information was on the tape because no one ever listened to, transcribed or duplicated it, the report by the Department of Transportation inspector general said.


The report concluded that the FAA generally cooperated with the independent panel investigating the terrorist attacks by providing documents about its activities on Sept. 11, but the actions of two FAA managers "did not, in our view, serve the interests of the FAA, the Department [of Transportation] or the public."

The report was conducted at the request of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) after the panel investigating the Sept. 11 attacks, officially known as the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, complained that the FAA had been less than forthcoming in turning over documents and issued a subpoena to the agency for more information.

The FAA said it was cooperating fully with the 9/11 panel. The agency said it took disciplinary action against the employee who destroyed the tape but declined to elaborate on what kind of action they took. [Earlier, an FAA official incorrectly stated that the agency took action against two employees in the case.]

"We believe the audiotape in question appears to be consistent with written statements and other materials provided to FBI investigators and would not have added in any significant way to the information contained in what has already been provided to investigators and members of the 9/11 commission," said FAA spokesman Greg Martin.

Hours after the hijacked planes flew into the World Trade Center Towers, the Pentagon and a Pennsylvania field, an FAA manager at the New York Air Route Traffic Control Center gathered six controllers who communicated or tracked two of the hijacked planes and recorded in a one-hour interview their personal accounts of what occurred, the report stated.

The manager, who is not named in the report, said that his intentions were to provide quick information to federal officials investigating the attack before the air traffic controllers involved took sick leave for the stress of their experiences, as is common practice.

According to the report, a second manager at the New York center promised a union official representing the controllers that he would "get rid of" the tape after controllers used it to provide written statements to federal officials about the events of the day.

Instead, the second manager said he destroyed the tape between December 2001 and January 2002 by crushing the tape with his hand, cutting it into small pieces and depositing the pieces into trash cans around the building, the report said.

The tape's existence was never made known to federal officials investigating the attack, nor to FAA officials in Washington. Staff members of the 9/11 panel found out about the tape during interviews with some controllers who participated in the recording.

One controller said she asked to listen to the tape in order to prepare her written account of her experience, but one of the managers denied her request.

The New York managers acknowledged that they received an e-mail from FAA officials instructing them to retain all materials related to the Sept. 11 attacks. "If a question arises whether or not you should retain the data, RETAIN IT," the report quoted the e-mail as saying.

But the managers decided not to include the tape in a November 2001 "Formal Accident Package" report the office prepared because one manager said he did not want to break his word to the union official and he did not think the tape should ever have been made.

The inspector general concluded today that the managers' actions resulted in the loss of potential evidence that would allow the 9/11 commission to compare controllers' recollection of the events immediately after the attacks with the written statements prepared three weeks later.

"The destruction of evidence in the Government's possession, in this case an audiotape -- particularly during times of national crisis -- has the effect of fostering an appearance that information is being withheld from the public."

Immortal Technique

Did it work?

Peanuts Kill More Americans Than Terrorists

If western governments were really trying win the "war on terror" they wouldn't give terrorists so much credit.

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Friday, January 5, 2007


The menace of global terrorism has been labeled the greatest threat to western civilization since communism and yet swimming pools, peanuts and lost deer kill more Americans every single year. Why are our governments facilitating the terrorist's agenda by hyping a peril that simply doesn't exist?

The number of Americans killed as a result of international terrorism since the 1960's gives us a benchmark from which we can correctly identify and target other dire dangers to our very way of life.

- Allergic reactions to peanuts

- Accident causing deer

- Lightning strikes

That's correct - all of the above have killed an equal number of Americans since 1960 as terrorism. One could even categorize M&M's, lost deer and the weather as an "axis of evil arming to threaten the peace of the world," as George Bush famously once said.


As Ohio State University's John Mueller concludes in a report entitled A False Sense Of Insecurity, "For all the attention it evokes, terrorism actually causes rather little damage and the likelihood that any individual will become a victim in most places is microscopic."

Last summer's much vaunted transatlantic terror plot, a facade that has since collapsed under the weight of its own absurdity, led to ridiculous measures in airports banning any form of liquids in carry on luggage and mother's were forced to drink their own breast milk. Yet there has not been a bomb planted in a piece of checked luggage on an American carrier since the 1988 Lockerbie disaster, itself a false flag inside job. Since that time hundreds of billions of Americans have been routinely interrogated about the contents of their luggage while cargo remains completely unchecked.

To equal the danger that Americans place themselves in every day by driving their car down the highway, there would have to be a September 11 every month. To reach the same level of risk that one undertakes in boarding an airline, you only have to travel eleven miles in a car.

The principle goal of terrorists is to terrify populations and governments into acquiescing to their political demands. The only way they can achieve this is by generating a substantial amount of fear and making people believe the lie that their life is significantly threatened by potential terrorism, when in reality the swimming pool in their backyard poses more of a danger.

As soon as we lose the fear, the terrorists lose their power over us to control our behavior. If western governments were really trying to win a war on terror as they claim then they would downplay and sideline acts of terror, pointing out that an individual has more chance of being struck by lightning than being killed in a terror attack.

And yet what do we see? George Bush and Dick Cheney frothing at the mouth predicting mushroom clouds over America, Fox News telling us every day it's not a matter of if but when we're attacked again, the British government warning that only "a miracle" would prevent London from being attacked over the holidays.


Mueller elaborates,

"What is needed, as one statistician suggests, is some sort of convincing, coherent, informed, and nuanced answer to a central question: “How worried should I be?” Instead, the message the nation has received so far is, as a Homeland Security official put (or caricatured) it, “Be scared; be very, very scared — but go on with your lives.” Such messages have led many people to develop what Leif Wenar of the University of Sheffield has aptly labeled “a false sense of insecurity.”

By making these statements and continually recycling the hysteria, these entities are facilitating the goals of terrorists, driving forward an agenda that could not alone be fueled by relatively minor, rare and inconsequential attacks that take few human lives in comparison to the real dangers that we face every day - mundane things like car accidents, cancer and heart disease.

In that context, allied with the voluminous evidence that every major terror attack we have witnessed was either a provocateured set-up or an outright inside job, western governments are staffed at the very top by terrorists who are openly espousing the creed and statecraft of terrorism.

Only by coming to the understanding that terrorism is such a limited threat to our livelihoods and communicating that to others can we disarm the alarmist propaganda that governments utilize in order to enlist our obedience for the construction of the prison planet.

Fear is a lie.

False
Evidence
Appearing
Real.