Archive for the ‘9/11 and the War on Terrorism’ Category
Barack Obama’s inaugural speech predicts “Extraterrestrial event” on scale of Iraq war says Canadian expert
UFOs and the New World Order
VIDEO: Quotations from mass media on elite mass deception associated with the U.S. President Barack Obama administration.
Get this article “unlocked”. Be this first reader to make a member pledge in order to see rest of this article. LINK
The Canadian is volunteer-driven, socially progressive, and not-for-profit oriented. You are invited to become a member.
Become a member. Make a member pledge, to help us publish similar articles, and cover expenses associated the maintaining The Canadian. LINK
Click HERE to become a Member Get on our VIP list.
You also become eligble to receive complimentary gifts in the mail from books to Canadian Maple Syrup to CDs to stereo systems to high definition televisions. We can email you thank you gift options.
OR, drop us a line for more information about membership.
E-mail: editorial@agoracosmopolitan.com
Afghanistan: West sends troops to protect fifth most corrupt government in the world

All wars have anthems for doomed youth. Afghanistan is no exception. At a memorial service on 12 July 2009, senior officers had paid tribute to the eight British soldiers who died in the worst day of attrition since the Falklands.
Of the three youngest, William Aldridge had a gift for friendship, Joseph Murphy was a fine artist and James Backhouse, who wanted to be a fitness instructor, could run faster than the wind. Like his two comrades, he was 18 years old. Like them, he was, according to his superiors’ eulogies, prepared to kill and to be killed.
With the Taliban getting smarter and 15 British troops dead so far this month, Afghanistan is a dimestore war. In four decades, the defence budget has fallen from 6.5 per cent of GDP to 3 per cent, while Tony Blair’s imperial ambitions committed troops to four major conflicts, of which Iraq was inexcusable and Afghanistan, on the current showing, unwinnable.
Mr Brown’s critics imply that he is trying to fight a Prada war at Lidl prices. Although he disputes this, defence spending is undeniably out of kilter with reality. The PM’s likely concession on Trident – cutting back on warheads and perhaps reducing the new fleet – is a feeble compromise that will not free up significant sums for the frontline. Nor is it likely that taxes will rise to boost defence.
But even if a war chest were to be found, there is little clarity about what we’re fighting for: the end of brutal and repressive Taliban mandates or, as Mr Brown says, to stop terror being exported to the UK. With al-Qaeda moving sinously across the globe, the second goal looks hopeless.
VIDEO: The Afghanistan war is part of a broader War for Oil with a neo-fascistic objective and not about the affirmation of democracy.
.
The real question is whether the Afghan war can ever be won by military means alone, and the answer, as David Miliband has always recognised, is No. In stirring up trouble for the Government, the generals and the Tories risk peddling a delusion. Yes, extra helicopters may save some lives (though by no means all), but the truth about Afghanistan risks being obscured by political opportunism. Even vast injections of money, hardware and manpower would not, by themselves, subdue the Taliban or procure victory.
A political solution is the only guarantee of success, yet that objective is barely spoken of. In the US and the UK, next month’s presidential election attracts almost no mention. Since the temporary increase in British troops is specifically to provide cover for the ballot, this silence is suspicious, if not downright sinister.
The appalling regime of Hamid Karzai is western leaders’ grubby little secret. Mr Karzai, who boasts of being Washington’s (and thus Britain’s) man, presides over the fifth most corrupt government in the world. As well as turning a blind eye to last year’s alleged loss, through abuse, of two thirds of his country’s annual revenue amounting to $1.6 billion, Mr Karzai has failed the vulnerable and the trusting.
internet site reference: LINK
Is an Oil Pipeline Behind Canada’s War against Osama bin Laden?
by Bill Sardi
The Globe and Mail had reported on 19 June 2008 in the article titled “Pipeline opens new front in Afghan war”, that so-called conspiracy theories associated with an oil pipeline as a basis for War in Afghanistan are apparently true. In that article, energy economist John Foster says the $7.6 billion pipeline “is part of a wider struggle by the U.S. to counter the influence of Russia and Iran over trade in the region.”
In the “war infomercial” we all get on TV, the current U.S. attack on Afghanistan is described as a war to stamp out terrorism and protect the American people. Amidst the flag waving, there is no discussion of oil or of rivalry with Russia and other neo-colonial interests. But, in fact, oil politics and neo-colonial interests are woven into all the moves and alliances that the U.S. is now making. LINK.
On February 12, 1998, John J. Maresca, vice president, international relations for UNOCAL oil company, testified before the US House of Representatives, Committee on International Relations. Maresca provided information to Congress on Central Asia oil and gas reserves and how they might shape U.S. foreign policy. UNOCAL’s problem? As Maresca said: “How to get the region’s vast energy resources to the markets.” The oil reserves are in areas north of Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Russia. Routes for a pipeline were proposed that would transport oil on a 42-inch pipe southward thru Afghanistan for 1040 miles to the Pakistan coast. Such a pipeline would cost about $2.5 billion and carry about 1 million barrels of oil per day. Maresca told U.S. Congress then that: “It’s not going to be built until there is a single Afghan government. That’s the simple answer.”
Dana Rohrbacher, California congressman, then identified the Taliban as the ruling controllers among various factions in Afghanistan and characterized them as “opium producers.”
Then Rohrbacher asked Maresca: “There is a Saudi terrorist who is infamous for financing terrorism around the world. Is he in the Taliban area or is he up there with the northern people?”
Maresca answered: “If it is the person I am thinking of, he is there in the Taliban area.” This testimony obviously alluded to Osama bin Laden.
Then Rorhbacher asked: “… in the northern area as compared to the place where the Taliban are in control, would you say that one has a better human rights record toward women than the other?”
Maresca responded by saying: “With respect to women, yes. But I don’t think either faction here has a very clean human rights record, to tell you the truth.”
So women’s rights were introduced into Congressional testimony by Congressman Rohrbacher as the wedge for UNOCAL to build its pipeline through Afghanistan. Three years later CNN would be airing its acclaimed TV documentary “Under The Veil,” which displayed the oppressive conditions that women endure in Afghanistan under the rule of the Taliban — a propaganda film for the oil pipeline?
Rohrbacher then had went on to say that a democratic election should take place in Afghanistan and “if the Taliban are not willing to make that kind of commitment, I would be very hesitant to move forward on a $2.5 billion investment because without that commitment, I don’t think there is going to be any tranquility in that land.”
Beginning in 1998 UNOCAL was chastised, particularly by women’s rights groups, for discussions with the Taliban, and headed in retreat as a worldwide effort mounted to come to the defence of the Afghani women. This forced UNOCAL to withdraw from its talks with the Taliban and dissolve its multinational partnership in that region. In 1999 Alexander’s Gas & Oil Connections newsletter said: “UNOCAL company officials said late last year (1998) they were abandoning the project because of the need to cut costs in the Caspian region and because of the repeated failure of efforts to resolve the long civil conflict in Afghanistan.” [Volume 4, issue #20 - Monday, November 22, 1999]
Three days following the attack on the World Trade Centers in New York City, UNOCAL issued a statement reconfirming it had withdrawn from its project in Afghanistan, long before recent events. [www.unocal.com September 14, 2001 statement]
UNOCAL was not the only party positioning themselves to tap into oil and gas reserves in central Asia. UNOCAL was primary member of a multinational consortium called CentGas (Central Asia Gas) along with Delta Oil Company Limited (Saudi Arabia), the Government of Turkmenistan, Indonesia Petroleum, LTD. (INPEX) (Japan), ITOCHU Oil Exploration Co., Ltd. (Japan), Hyundai Engineering & Construction Co., Ltd. (Korea), the Crescent Group (Pakistan) and RAO Gazprom (Russia).
Just because CentGas had dissolved does not mean that the involved parties have totally abandoned their interest in building an oil pipeline out of Central Asia. There is also talk of another pipeline thru Iran. India and Pakistan are bidding to be the pipeline terminal ocean port since they would obtain hundreds of millions of dollars in fees.
|
||
So, in 1998 Osama bin Laden was identified as the villain behind the Taliban, Afghani women the victims of an oppressive Taliban regime, and the stage was set for a future stabilization effort (i.e. a war). Was all this a cover story for a future oil pipeline?
In November 2000, Bruce Hoffman, director of the Rand Institute office in Washington D.C., indicated that the next U.S. President would have to face up to the growing threat is Islamic terrorism. Hoffman: “The next administration must turn its immediate attention to knitting together the full range of U.S. counterterrorist capabilities into a cohesive plan.” [Los Angeles Times, November 12, 2000]
All that was needed was a triggering event.
About the writer:
Bill Sardi is an investigative journalist. Check out his website.
BookAgora.com can help you publish your book. Check out Our Services to You. We invite you to submit your manuscript
Do you have an idea for a book? Contact us for more information. You can make money self-publishing your own book. Skip the hassle of corporate trade publishers that prefer to publish well established authors. Help spread further social awareness.
Colonial Dementia: Canadians must rally against continue genocide in Occupied Afghanistan
by Thahoketoteh of Kanekota, First Nations Columnist
Canada signed U.N. res. 1514 on December 14, 1960, that was the declaration for all members to end the disease of colonialism. The whole structure of the Canadian political system is colonial. The senate still holds half the power of lawmaking in Canada . Mr. Harper says he will force them to accept his new policing laws, that are a part of his new world order agenda, dictated to him from his bosses in Washington. Canada is already a police state, as anyone here on the ground can attest. What reason does Mr. Harper have for advancing the police powers? Has he asked the Canadian people what they think?
It comes right back to the 9/11 hoax that Harper’s real bosses instigated to advance their goal of making us all slaves. Genocide on a scale not seen since the Nazi nightmare, is happening in Afghanistan right now. Read this article, LINK. It is yet another, in a long line, exposing the criminals and their dastardly deeds. The Harper government acts like they are in a dictatorial role, even though they are a minority government, in the colonial system that is supposed to be gone.
The true power is in the minds of the people. The people are starting to realize this as they use their minds properly, instead of allowing others to decide for them. The mind control technologies that most western governments have adopted, is for making the people stop thinking for themselves and act like a herd being led to slaughter. The real Canadian people are waking up to this reality. When the next election happens they will put Mr. Harper back where he belongs, in the cage where he wants to put them.
There is hope for Canada to become a beacon of truth and justice. The rest of the world is looking and hoping that Canadians will arise from their slumber. Hopefully Canadians who are inspired by the re-affirmation of Canada as socially progressive inspired society will wake up the “real” American people who embrace certain democratic ideals, and stop this madness. Then the world will know peace.
Unity, Strength, Peace.
BookAgora.com can help you publish your book. Check out Our Services to You. We invite you to submit your manuscript
Do you have an idea for a book? Contact us for more information. You can make money self-publishing your own book. Skip the hassle of corporate trade publishers that prefer to publish well established authors. Help spread further social awareness.
The Cuban Five exposes U.S. hypocrisy of the War on Terror
by Sabrina Johnson
![]() |
||
|
“And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation in every region now has a decision to make: Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime.” This had been former President Bush’s declaration to the world after September 11th, 2001.
In actual fact, however, this administration has exposed the undeniable hypocrisy of its “War on Terror” by granting freedom and safe haven to Luis Posada Carriles who, along with Orlando Bosch (another terrorist who was pardoned by President Bush Sr.), masterminded the first act of aviation terrorism in this hemisphere in 1976. The mid-air explosion of a Cubana commercial airliner killed all 73 people aboard. He was arrested in Venezuela and he escaped from prison during the course of his trial.
Carriles was recruited by the CIA, trained in explosives at the School of the Americas and was involved in a multitude of terrorist operations, including Operation Condor and the Iran-Contra operation in Nicaragua. From 1967 to 1975 he also worked for the DISIP (Venezuelan Intelligence Service), organizing torture sessions of Venezuelan guerrillas. In 2000 he was arrested trying to assassinate Fidel Castro with C4 explosives found in his possession, while Castro was going to give a speech at the University of Panama and, thereby, endangering the lives of all those attending. Panama’s outgoing President then pardoned him just before relocating to Miami.
In 2005, Carriles was arrested for illegally entering the U.S., although a federal judge subsequently dismissed all the charges citing the government’s translator’s erroneous interpretation of Posada’s naturalization interview. Venezuela’s request to have him extradited has been denied and the Bush administration also refuses to refer to him as a terrorist, even though he is responsible for nearly 100 murders.
According to international law, if a country chooses not to extradite a terrorist, it has to try him under terrorist charges, in its own courts and this is something else that the U.S. has refused to do. By contrast, the U.S. government has had no problem incarcerating five Cuban men, who selflessly risked their lives by infiltrating well-documented terrorist groups, in order to prevent terrorist attacks against Cuba and its people.
Gerardo Hernández, Fernando Gonzalez, Ramón Labañino, Antonio Guerrero and René Gonzalez (also referred to as the ‘Cuban 5’) have just begun serving their 10th year of imprisonment this past September 12th. They are very familiar with the effects of terrorism, considering that Cuba has been the target of constant terrorist attacks planned, financed and organized on U.S. soil by extreme right-wing Cuban-exile organizations, since 1959, which caused the deaths of 3478 people (including a resident of Montreal, Fabio de Celmo) and permanent injuries to 2099 persons.
Some of these attacks have consisted of: the burning of vast sugar cane and vegetable fields, attacks against the Cuban Consulate in New York, the Cuban Embassy in the Dominican Republic, the Cuban Ambassador to Haiti, the Cuban Consul in Miami, the offices of the ‘Revolución’, ‘La Calle’ and ‘Bohemia’ newspapers, the Cuban Embassy in Caracas, the Cuban Embassy in Peru, the National Revolutionary Police, hijacking of planes and boats, burning of schools, sabotage of factories, of drinking water reservoirs, of train tracks, aerial bombings of Cuban cities, attacks on civilians’ homes, bombing of a French transport ship in the Havana port (killing 101 and wounding more than 200), bombing of a supermarket, movie theatres and hotels, assassinations and the bombing in mid-air of a Cubana commercial airliner, killing all 73 civilians on board.
Sadly, this list is only an introduction of the years of terrorism suffered by the Cuban people at the hands of groups such as Commandos F4, Brigade 2506, CORU, CANF, MIRR, Omega 7 and Alpha 66, just to name a few. It should be noted that the assistance of U.S. authorities in prosecuting the individuals involved has been non-existent, though financial assistance provided by U.S. government agencies has often found its way to these terrorist organizations.
The Cuban Five posed no danger to the national security of the U.S. or to any individual. In fact, there were no weapons and not a single page of U.S. classified information found, at the time of their arrest. Nonetheless, they were arrested and placed in solitary confinement for 17 months. Everything that was seized as evidence, was immediately rendered ‘classified’ by the authorities and, as a result, the defence lawyers didn’t have access to most of the evidence while preparing the Five’s defence. The defence requested a change of venue, due to Miami’s rampant anti-Cuba political bias and this request was denied.
The actual terrorists were never arrested, even though Cuban authorities had provided the FBI with detailed information on these groups’ activities, samples of confiscated explosives, contact information, recorded conversations and more, some time prior to the Five’s arrest.
The Cuban Five were sentenced to a total of four life sentences plus 77 years, for “conspiracy to commit espionage” and “conspiracy to commit murder”, even though no proof was presented documenting either charge (for all the details on the case, see LINK). They have been serving their sentences in five different prisons scattered across the U.S., and the wives of René and Gerardo have not seen their husbands since their arrest, due to the U.S. continuously denying their visa requests to visit them.
For the first time in U.S. history, three appeals have been made and we are now awaiting the result of the third hearing, which took place this past August 20th. A press release from the Cuban 5’s defence shortly after the hearing stated:
“…the Defense, demonstrated irrefutably that the improper conduct of the Government during the entire legal process against the five constituted a flagrant violation of due process that influenced the entire proceeding…Other key arguments of the Defense that demonstrate the arbitrariness of the process is lack of evidence to sustain the two main accusations “conspiracy to commit espionage and conspiracy to commit murder in the first degree” and the imposition of completely irrational and unjustifiable life sentences…Throughout the tainted process the Government admitted that its real concern was to protect the anti-Cuban terrorist groups that operate with total immunity in Miami and to punish those who fight against them.”
One of the biggest difficulties has been getting the information out to the public, due to the media wall of silence around this case.
Help support The Canadian Exopolitics Newspaper.
Scepticism, 9/11 and the War on Terrorism
by Kevin Ryan
![]() |
||
|
In early November 2007, I had a chance to debate the issue of 9/11 Truth on the Thom Hartmann radio show, with an avowed supporter of the official story, Skeptic magazine’s Michael Shermer. It was an interesting experience, and some good information was communicated, although the format did not allow for a detailed discussion.[1] One thing this debate did reveal was the need for true scepticism in our society.
I was aware that it took months for Hartmann’s producer to find a legitimate defender of the official version of 9/11. Apparently those who knew something of the official story would not publicly support it, and those who would publicly support that official story didn’t know anything about it. That fact in itself is a testament to the progress made by the 9/11 Truth Movement over the last few years.
But in September, after receiving an unsolicited email from Shermer, I invited him to join me for the Hartmann debate. From Skeptic magazine’s “9/11 Conspiracies” issue last year, it was clear that Shermer was not aware of many of the facts about 9/11 either. But he was well known for his stance on the issue, and I felt this was a chance to follow-up on Hartmann’s offer. With that in mind, I approached the debate carefully, with respect for my opponent, the audience and the host.
It didn’t take long during to understand Shermer’s position on 9/11. He did not bother with facts about the events themselves, and appeared to be motivated only through a “monster under the bed” perception of “conspiracy theories”. Even after admitting that the official version of events is itself a conspiracy theory, he maintained that conspiracy among oil company executives and politicians is somehow unbelievable, while conspiracy solely among people who just happen to live on the last remaining oil-rich land is to be expected.
Additionally, Shermer’s performance showed that he is not what most people would call a sceptic, at least not in matters that are important to people. I had suspected this myself, and had to check the definition of scepticism to be sure. What I found was that scepticism is about questioning claims that are generally accepted, or are given by supposedly authoritative sources. Skeptics are not people who simply take contradictory positions without regard for evidence, however, and after rational discussion sceptics usually agree with the case that best fits the evidence.
On several issues, Shermer has taken a decidedly non-sceptical approach. The events of 9/11 are one example, and global warming is another. It took him years to come around on the issue of global warming, even after the IPCC had satisfied nearly all scientists with their assessment of the situation in 2001. Shermer continued as a leading sceptic of global warming, telling us not to worry about it, until his well-publicized “flipping point” in 2006.[2] It seems his scepticism might have more to do with business interests than it has to do with reason.
At the start of our debate, Shermer responded to my scepticism about the history of al Qaeda by suggesting that our government gets in bed with bad people all the time. At that point, I wasn’t sure whose side of the debate he was on. But it soon became clear that Shermer was only ready to talk about the demolition hypothesis, and then only in the sense that he wanted me to prove that hypothesis. Although I could have given more detailed evidence, it was gratifying to know that this last remaining, relatively legitimate defender of the official story had only a few points of unsubstantiated speculation to support his supposedly reasoned scepticism.
Shermer was clearly not sceptical of any of the claims made by the only authoritative source on the topic, the current U.S. government. He had no response when I asked how each and every member of the U.S. chain of command could have been indisposed for just those two hours on September 11th, or how al Qaeda could have been behind the effective stand-down of the nation’s air defences during that time. He could not say why the 9/11 Commission left so many of the most important facts out of their report, or what it meant for U.S. government scientists to finally admit that they could not explain the “collapse” of the Twin Towers. His final plea was that we just accept that al Qaeda did it because they said they did it, and we should take them at their word.
This strange approach to scepticism is a good example of the growing attempt by corporate media representatives (Shermer also works for FOX TV) to convince us to believe the opposite of what we see and hear. We’re told that the best way to stop terrorism is to start endless wars in the Middle East, and the best way to protect our freedoms is to give up our freedoms and, paradoxically, anyone who questions the government’s conspiracy theory is a “conspiracy theorist”.
Within that kind of framework, some people might really believe that Michael Shermer is a sceptic. But what we find is that Sceptic magazine is not skeptical of things that matter to people today, like electronic voting machines or media consolidation. Instead, this publication aims to protect us from “bad ideas” like the possibility of UFOs, or the belief in God. Shermer must know that if people are really going to be skeptical, they will be so about authoritative claims that affect their lives in serious ways, like the rationale behind the “War on Terror”. And as I said during the debate, the absurd attempts to keep people from questioning 9/11 have so far amounted to just so much speculative distraction.
The truth is that there is no aspect of the official story that cannot be severely criticized, or shown to be completely false. Two reports, one from the 9/11 Commission and one from a branch of the U.S. Department of Commerce, known as NIST, constitute the official version of events for 9/11. And both of these reports are riddled with inconsistencies and outright falsehoods.[3, 4] Additionally, we know that many involved in producing those reports had serious conflicts of interest.[5, 6, 7]
In the end Shermer and I did agree on one thing, and that is that the truth is likely to be simple. His version of simple, however, is that terrorism is about astoundingly lucky acts of random vengeance, with the Gods of Science turning a few blind eyes here and there. On the other hand, to me the simple truth is more likely to be that terrorism is a co-opted tool, used by a powerful few to help secure their strategic interests. In any case, when such truth becomes not only simple, but also obvious, we need to start being truly sceptical.
Endnotes:
[1] Air America/Thom Hartman 9/11 Truth Debate: Kevin Ryan vs. Michael Shermer, MP3 found at Portland Independent Media Center, LINK
[2] Michael Shermer, The Flipping Point, Scientific American, June 2006, LINK
[3] David Ray Griffin, The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions (Northampton: Interlink Books, 2005). Griffin summarizes the omissions and distortions in “The 9/11 Commission Report: A 571-Page Lie,” 911 Visibility Project, May 22, 2005 LINK.
[4] Kevin Ryan, What is 9/11 Truth? – The First Steps, Journal of 911 Studies, August 2006, PDF LINK.
[5] 911Research.com, The Kean Commission: The Official Commission Avoids the Core Issues, LINK
[6] 911Truth.org, 9/11 Commission: The official coverup guide, LINK
[7] Kevin Ryan, Looking for Truth in Credentials, GlobalResearch.ca, March 13, 2007, LINK
About the writer:
Kevin Ryan is co-editor of the Journal of 9/11 Studies, LINK and the former Site Manager for Underwriters Laboratories in South Bend, Indiana.
BookAgora.com can help you publish your book. Check out Our Services to You. We invite you to submit your manuscript
Do you have an idea for a book? Contact us for more information. You can make money self-publishing your own book. Skip the hassle of corporate trade publishers that prefer to publish well established authors. Help spread further social awareness.
First Nations Insight: War and the marginalization of the feminine perspectives
Liberals and Conservatives collude in elite inspired agenda against Occupied Afghanistan
by Thahoketoteh of Kanekota
![]() |
|
Why is Canada’s government passing bills to continue an illegal, immoral war in Afghanistan? The Liberal and Conservative Parties are obviously ruled by the same people through their corresponding control of Canada’s colonial senate.
The Senate is dominated by Liberal and Conservative unelected appointees.
The quintessential colonial structure of Canada has remained the same since the British system landed here. The same families who control the economy also control the government and lawmaking powers through Parliament inclusive of the Senate.
Canada signed UN 1514 on December 14, 1960. This was the treaty on decolonization. The apparent shadow government that has always ultimately ruled Canada, obviously never intended to honour that treaty. That would mean Canada would have to become a true participatory and constitutional democracy and they never wanted that.
The Harper Conservatives, backed by the Liberals, will now keep Canadian troops (that has been placed under a U.S. military command pursuant to the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP)) in Afghanistan for at least three more years. It looks like the Senate holds a lot more power than Canadians are lead to believe. Canada’s elitist Senate acts similar to the de facto One Party system in the U.S. with these same families running that country. I forward a link to a video on the war that is short, but looks at it historically. LINK.
If the women of Canada controlled the Senate, the war problem would be solved. If the women of the world took their proper place in the consensus process, war would never happen again. The agents of a male patriarchy that seeks to promote war, commercially profits from it, and they all can be traced to these same families.
The women bear the children and are responsible for the land they bring them into. That is the same in all nature. We all come from our mothers so we should ask our mothers what is their opinion about sending their children to die and commit murder in the name of economy. The true “terror threat” is the mad men that control the pretend democracies of this world through, as president Eisenhower called them, the military industrial complex.
We people of this world have to stand up for our future generations in the name of peace on earth. Ask your own mother what she thinks about war. The time is now to end the war problem before the next cosmological event that is sure to come.
With unity of mind through the natural law, comes great strength.
9/11 book sheds light on post 9/11 democracy in America
A Real 9/11 Commission Will Help Free America Now!
by Paul J. Landis
Paperback,
ISBN: 0976040824
Book description:
The book entitled A Real 9/11 Commissions Will Help Free America Now! was written to provide evidence before it was filtered by Bush and Cheney, or removed by our controlled mainstream media.
The reader is invited to see pictures from documentaries of footage that was shown on live TV the morning of 9/11 and provided the opportunity to participate, to ‘Render a decision’ on the evidence seen, both manually and on-line.
In May 2006, a Zogby International national poll found that 42 percent of adults polled believe the U.S. government and the 9/11 Commission “concealed or refused to investigate critical evidence” that contradicts the official explanation of the attacks. And, 9/11 Commission chairs Republican Thomas Kean and Democrat Lee Hamilton, say in their new book Without Precedent: The Sept. 11 commission was so frustrated with repeated misstatements by the Pentagon and FAA about their response to the 2001 terror attacks that it considered an investigation into possible deception.
In addition to the 42% above, the same May 2006 national Zogby respondents say “More than 40 percent of Americans believe that the 9/11 Commission Report that investigated the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks is a cover-up”.
Wow! And now, hold on to you hats: based upon a review of their book Without Precedent, we have significant doubts being expressed by these two 9/11 commissioners: Join us Mr. Kean and Mr. Hamilton in “A Real 9/11 Investigation”.
A key question for a “A Real 9/11 Commission” or if you like, a new, trustworthy 9/11 commission is What would it do differently?
How would or could, Don Rumsfeld prove to the American people that the 757 he says hit the Pentagon really did? If asked, participants in “A Real 9/1 Commission” would say, “he can’t!” Not only are there NO pictures showing a 60 to 80 ton 757 on the lawn of the Pentagon, we would play for Don the 9/11 AM CNN Live report on Loose Change 2nd edition “there is no evidence that a 757 has hit anywhere near the Pentagon!”
We would also remind Don that the famous collapsed Pentagon wall section, if that is where he tells us the plane is? That section collapsed twenty minutes after the explosion. Did the 757 just wait around for a hole to climb into?
So Mr. Kean and Mr. Hamilton, any comments?
The New York City Twin Towers, where 3,000 people lost their lives, we were told ‘collapsed’ because of the planes that hit them. If we asked Don or Dick Cheney to prove this, what could they use? There is a NTST report that supports this claim. But does the evidence support this report?
![]() |
|
Briefly: No. We now know that molten steel, 3,000 degrees, was found in the sub-basements of both Towers (and WTC 7) four and five weeks after their collapse. We can only suggest in the space available here, that the reader look at the Special Report in A Real 9/11 Commission Will Help Free America Now on pages 32 to 52 and on the books web site.
You will see photographs of the building ‘collapse’ and can compare these pictures with live TV statements by TV news reporters. We have pictures of multi-ton steel columns projected horizontally into near-by buildings and multi-ton steel structures thrown 600 feet or two football fields away from the ‘collapse’. Is this how you would envision the ‘collapse’ of the massive structures?
And live video recordings of the Towers ‘collapse’ with the sounds of the ‘demolition charges’, would that help Don and Dick? Obviously not: see “911 Eyewitness”, by Mr. Ricard A. Siegel.
We might ask the commissioners: How is it that the collapse of these structures produced only pulverized debris and steel beams conveniently cut into sections that fit on the backs of the trucks used to haul them away? And if the Towers ‘collapsed’, where did the 2,600 pollutants come from that have thus far claimed the lives of twelve “First Responders” and caused 70,000 illnesses?
For the assertion that Flight 93 crashed in Pennsylvania, we will just suggest you see statements by coroners on the scene in Pennsylvania saying “there was no blood or evidence of human remains at the site”, Loose Change Second Edition, http://www.loosechange911.com.
So Don and Dick appear to have no EVIDENCE to justify the statements they made. How about Mr. Kean and Mr. Hamilton, perhaps they want to explain their lapse of finding the above EVIDENCE or any EVIDENCE that the 42% of poll respondents say was ignored?
On a Book TV interview about their book “Without Precedent”, Mr. Hamilton states, “we were there to tell the story.” Unfortunately, the moderator, Mr. Marvin Kalb was too busy being polite and never asked: “What story? The one Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney told us or the one substantiated by facts?”
“Very recommended: “Be sure to check out the great work done by Lynn Pentz and the L.A. Citizens’ Grand Jury. Their results, note this Mr. Kean and Mr. Hamilton, match the above information page 158.
“We the People” were lied to about the events of 9/11. We were lied to by the same people who recently made us ‘Torturers’, who are using their own Weapon of Mass Destruction, a radioactive weapon called Depleted Uranium that is killing OUR soldiers and causing their wives to give birth to deformed babies. We were lied to by the same people who have their own Non-U.S. Constitution – the “Project for the New American Century”. These people are not Osama bin Laden or Al-Qaida. They are Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and their friends who support the Non-U.S. Constitution the Project for the New American Century — the apparent motivation for the attacks of 9/11/2001.
Get this at BooksAgora.com Bookstore Consortium
Featured LINK: Alternative Lifestyles Personals – Free and anonymous membership







