[911TruthAction] Digest Number 1190

There are 19 messages in this issue.

Topics in this digest:

1. Re: McBride: Why the Official Story on 9/11 is Going to Collapse
From: Naveed <flanker12k@yahoo.com>
2. Charlie Sheen Isn't the Only 9/11 Conspiracy
From: "mojo_j_2000" <mojo_j_2000@yahoo.com>
3. Re: Vote in CNN's "Is CharlieSheen Correct Poll" Currently 72% Yes to 28%!
From: "mojo_j_2000" <mojo_j_2000@yahoo.com>
4. Re: Fw: Israel Lobby Dictates U.S. Policy, Study Charges
From: "mojo_j_2000" <mojo_j_2000@yahoo.com>
5. Re: CNN Poll, Transcripts of Charlie Sheen & Alex Jones
From: "mojo_j_2000" <mojo_j_2000@yahoo.com>
6. Re: McBride: Why the Official Story on 9/11 is Going to Collapse
From: "mojo_j_2000" <mojo_j_2000@yahoo.com>
7. COASTTOCOAST DRUDGE AP
From: "mojo_j_2000" <mojo_j_2000@yahoo.com>
8. MUSTER A FIRING SQUAD
From: "mojo_j_2000" <mojo_j_2000@yahoo.com>
9. Re: Zionist Domination
From: Kevin Hammond <sir_oglaigh@yahoo.com>
10. It's criminal
From: "mojo_j_2000" <mojo_j_2000@yahoo.com>
11. Silverstein can’t get it up
From: "mojo_j_2000" <mojo_j_2000@yahoo.com>
12. A Boeing 757 did not hit the Pentagon......maybe an A-3
From: "mojo_j_2000" <mojo_j_2000@yahoo.com>
13. Under the Hammer at CNN - Sheen, Tarpley, Alex Jones
From: John Leonard <jpleonard@verizon.net>
14. RE: Re: Do you agree with Charlie Sheen? Vote Now
From: "Scott Peden" <scotpeden@cruzio.com>
15. coast to coast: alex jones...the worm has turned
From: "mojo_j_2000" <mojo_j_2000@yahoo.com>
16. Israeli Software Firm Drops U.S. Deal
From: "mojo_j_2000" <mojo_j_2000@yahoo.com>
17. Can anyone help me to answer William Blum's questions re. 9/11?
From: James Patton <james_patton@yahoo.com>
18. Re: Can anyone help me to answer William Blum's questions re. 9/11?
From: greg nixon <nxngrg@yahoo.com>
19. winnipeg - part of larger war, uh," exercise" ? Gulp.
From: Cathy Garger <savorsuccesslady@yahoo.com>

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 22:10:28 -0800 (PST)
From: Naveed <flanker12k@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: McBride: Why the Official Story on 9/11 is Going to Collapse

not necessarily a room temperature IQ but the hyper-suggestive state induced by trauma-based mind control techniques. i beleive it is also dependent on the amount of TV one watches

Dick Eastman <olfriend@nwinfo.net> wrote: From: Sean McBride


March 23, 2006

Why the Official Story on 9/11 is Going to Collapse

The official story on 9/11 is so absurd and ridiculous on its face, in so many different but consistent ways, that one would have to have a room temperature IQ to believe it. The story is indefensible because whatever group that was behind this operation severely bungled the job, in ways which make the Lavon Affair, the USS Liberty attack and Iran-Contra look relatively like works of genius.

In fair and open debate on the Internet, the official story has been thoroughly demolished. Defenders of the official story for the most part are now afraid to raise their heads, and have been sent running for the tall grass. Only a single force is holding the official story in place: brutal and systematic censorship by the mainstream media of discussion of nearly all aspects of 9/11. Eventually we are going to see an open revolt from within the journalistic establishment by people with better than room temperature IQs who can no longer bear the bullshit being promoted by the tiny cabal of billionaires which owns CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal and the rest of the thoroughly discredited mainstream media.

The cabal which is protecting the official lies about 9/11 is the very same cabal which drove America into the disastrous Iraq War. The collapse of the war effort in Iraq will help foster the collapse of the official story on 9/11. The individuals behind these crimes have placed themselves in a perilous position. Committing further crimes -- including a nuclear 9/11 Part II -- will only make their position much worse. No member of the American power elite and national security community who is sane will want to have anything to do with any more of their bright ideas, and will be on a maximum state of alert to prevent them from committing further damage.

What would be a suitable punishment for crimes of this magnitude? Perhaps a group public hanging on international television?

/ / /

---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

Visit your group "911TruthAction" on the web.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
911TruthAction-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

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

In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot.
- Notebook, 1904

---------------------------------
New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC for low, low rates.

[This message contained attachments]

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 2
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 06:21:53 -0000
From: "mojo_j_2000" <mojo_j_2000@yahoo.com>
Subject: Charlie Sheen Isn't the Only 9/11 Conspiracy

http://www.postchronicle.com/commentary/article_21211566.shtml

http://www.911podcasts.com/default.php?
cat=9999&med=0&ord=Name&strt=0&vid=0&epi=0&typ=0

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 3
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 06:22:44 -0000
From: "mojo_j_2000" <mojo_j_2000@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Vote in CNN's "Is CharlieSheen Correct Poll" Currently 72% Yes to 28%!

NOW ITS 79 Y
21 N

--- In 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com, ranger116@... wrote:
>
> Vote in CNN's "Is CharlieSheen Correct Poll" Currently 72% Yes to
28%!
>
> Vote in CNN Sheen Poll here
> Down a couple screen on the left.
> CNN.com -
> Address:http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/showbiz.tonight/
>
> (We get this exposed and Normal ? Sheeple talking and
investigating and
> the Bush Crime Family will Fall !)
>
> THE WISDOM FUND News Flash
> MORE
> at http://911sig.blogspot.com
>
> CONTACT information at bottom of page
> March 23, 2006
>
> Charlie Sheen and Alex Jones Speak Out on 9/11
>         In what may be a first for major news media,
> alternative views of the September 11, 2001 attack on America were
> voiced by actor Charlie Sheen and radio talk show host Alex Jones.
>
>         Nineteen men with box-cutters hijacking four
> commercial airliners - that's the conspiracy theory they say.
>
> Sheen and Jones were on the opening segment of Showbiz Tonight on
CNN
> Headline News at 7:00PM EST this evening. We understand the show
will
> repeat at 11:00PM EST.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> CNN is polling its viewers: "Do you agree with Charlie Sheen that
the
> U.S. government covered up the real events of the 9/11 attacks?"
>
> (Vote in CNN Sheen Right or Wrong Poll Here !--->)
>
> At present 65% of respondents have cast yes votes; 35% cast no
votes.
> Votes may be cast at
> http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/showbiz.tonight/.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 4
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 06:24:30 -0000
From: "mojo_j_2000" <mojo_j_2000@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Fw: Israel Lobby Dictates U.S. Policy, Study Charges

APPROVED FOR PUBLICATON

--- In 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com, "Dick Eastman" <olfriend@...>
wrote:
>
> From: smcbride2@...
>
>
> March 23, 2006
> Israel Lobby Dictates U.S. Policy, Study Charges
>
> CRIMES AND CORRUPTIONS OF THE NEW WORLD ORDER
NEWS
>
>
> Israel Lobby Dictates U.S. Policy, Study Charges
> POLITICS
> Emad Mekay
>
> WASHINGTON, Mar 22 (IPS) - The pro-Israel lobby
in the United States has manipulated Washington's policies in the
Middle East to the point where it is the U.S. that does most of the
fighting, dying and rebuilding while Israel reaps most of the
security benefits, argues a new study by two U.S. scholars.
>
> "This situation has no equal in American
political history," says the 83-page study, "The Israel Lobby and
U.S. Foreign Policy".
>
> "Why has the United States been willing to set
aside its own security and that of many of its allies in order to
advance the interests of another state?" ask authors John
Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago and Stephen Walt of the
John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University.
>
> The answer, according to the paper, which is
already stirring debate in academic circles and fury among pro-
Israel groups, is the influence of the pro-Israel lobby.
>
> These groups include the American Israel Public
Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the Conference of Presidents of Major
Jewish Organisations, the Jewish Institute for National Security
Affairs, the Washington Institute for Near Eastern Policy, and more
recently, Christian Zionist organisations.
>
> A shorter version of the study was published in
the London Review of Books on Mar. 10. The authors say their
research is so strong that they doubt that any U.S. mainstream
publication would dare publish it.
>
> Based on sources that include Israeli scholars
and journalists, international human rights organisations, and
testimony from the lobby itself and politicians that support it, the
study examines how the pro-Israel lobby built up its influence in
Washington and says its intimidation of the press, think tanks and
academia has led to a deceptive picture of Israel.
>
> Since World War II, the United States has
channeled 140 billion dollars in support to Israel, notes the study,
which also challenges the notion that Israel is a "crucial ally in
the war on terror, because its enemies are America's enemies".
>
> "Saying that Israel and the United States are
united by a shared terrorist threat has the causal relationship
backwards: rather, the United States has a terrorism problem in good
part because it is so closely allied with Israel, not the other way
around," the authors argue.
>
> "In short, treating Israel as America's most
important ally in the campaign against terrorism and assorted Middle
East dictatorships both exaggerates Israel's ability to help on
these issues and ignores the ways that Israel's policies make U.S.
efforts more difficult," they say.
>
> According to the study, pro-Israel lobby groups
have exploited the sensitivities of major media outlets and of U.S.
politicians to campaign contributions to maintain their sympathy for
Israel regardless of what it does in the region.
>
> During AIPAC's annual conference earlier this
month, which attracted top U.S. officials and Congressional leaders,
the new Republican majority leader in the U.S. House of
Representatives, John Boehner, vowed never to allow anti-Israel
legislation come to the floor.
>
> "As the new House majority leader, I can assure
you that under my leadership, legislation that is in any way
perceived as anti-Israel will not be considered in the House of
Representatives," said Boehner.
>
> The study also points to Washington's staunch
support of Israel at the United Nations. Since 1982, it says, the
United States has vetoed 32 Security Council resolutions critical of
Israel -- a number greater than the combined total of vetoes cast by
all the other Security Council members. And it has blocked Arab
states' efforts to put Israel's nuclear arsenal on the agenda of the
International Atomic Energy Agency.
>
> At home, the lobby has worked hard to suppress
its critics, something the authors say has not been good for
democracy, especially one that now claims to be promoting freedom in
the Arab world.
>
> "Silencing sceptics by organising blacklists and
boycotts -- or by suggesting that critics are anti-Semites --
violates the principle of open debate upon which democracy depends,"
they say.
>
> The study was immediately attacked by a number
of pro-Israel organisations. The Committee for Accuracy in Middle
East Reporting in America, for example, said in a statement that it
had many errors, and that, "A student who submitted such a paper
would flunk."
>
> Newspapers like the New York Sun, known for its
pro-Israel stance, published supportive reactions to the study from
a prominent white supremacist and from the Muslim Brotherhood in
Egypt as evidence that the authors catered to extreme tastes.
>
> Eliot Engel, a Democratic congressman from New
York who is Jewish, said that the paper "really deserves the
contempt of the American people," and described it as "the same old
anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist drivel".
>
> "We fully recognised that the lobby would
retaliate against us," Prof. Mearsheimer told IPS. "We expected the
story we told in the piece would apply to us after it was published.
We are not surprised that we've come under attack by the lobby."
>
> The paper notes that the pro-Israel lobby has
also been bolstered by the support of prominent, and some would say
extremist, Christian evangelicals like Gary Bauer, Jerry Falwell,
Ralph Reed and Pat Robertson, as well as congressmen Dick Armey and
Tom DeLay, former majority leaders in the House of Representatives,
all of whom believe Israel's rebirth is the fulfillment of biblical
prophecy and support its expansionist agenda.
>
> Neo-conservative "gentiles" such as John Bolton;
Robert Bartley, the former Wall Street Journal editor; William
Bennett, the former secretary of education; Jeanne Kirkpatrick, the
former U.N. ambassador; and the influential columnist George Will
are also committed supporters of the Israel lobby.
>
> While the pro-Israel lobby has managed a number
of successes for Israel, the cost for the United States is mounting,
the study says.
>
> "This situation is deeply worrisome, because the
Lobby's influence causes trouble on several fronts," says the study.
These include possible increases in the military danger that all
states face -- including Washington's European allies.
>
> By preventing U.S. leaders from pressuring
Israel to make peace, the lobby has also made it impossible to end
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which gives extremists a potent
recruiting tool and enlarges the pool of potential militants, the
authors say. And new attempts by the lobby to "change regimes" in
Iran and Syria could lead the United States to attack those
countries, with potentially disastrous effects.
>
> "We do not need another Iraq. At a minimum, the
Lobby's hostility toward these countries makes it especially
difficult for Washington to enlist them against al Qaeda and the
Iraqi insurgency, where their help is badly needed," it says.
>
> The authors counted a number of other negative
effects on both the United Sates and Israel. These include how the
U.S. is now supporting Israel's expansionist policies in the West
Bank, making Washington appear complicit in human rights abuses.
>
> U.S. backing has emboldened extremists to reject
a number of opportunities for peace deals with Arab countries like
Syria, with the Palestinians and the implementation of the Oslo
Accords, the study says.
>
> Mearsheimer said he and co-author Walt were
prompted to write the piece after many years of studying U.S.
foreign policy in the Middle East.
>
> "It was clear to us that many people understood
the problem that we describe in the piece but were afraid to talk
about it... because the lobby would retaliate," he told IPS.
(END/2006)
>
> http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=32599
>

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 5
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 06:30:33 -0000
From: "mojo_j_2000" <mojo_j_2000@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: CNN Poll, Transcripts of Charlie Sheen & Alex Jones

CHIMPY IS JUST A GROCERY CLERK SENT TO COLLECT A BILL...

CHIMPY'S UNCLE PRESCOTT AND LEE K CHINK SAY FUKU AMRICA...

IMPEACH CHIMPY

http://democrats.com/senate-censure

--- In 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com, John Leonard <jpleonard@...>
wrote:
>
> CNN is running a poll: Do you agree with Charlie Sheen that the
U.S.
> government covered up the real events of the 9/11 attacks? At 7:30
pm
> PST the score is 2277 votes or 72% yes, 886 votes or 28% no.
>
>
> CNN TRANSCRIPTS
>
> http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0603/22/sbt.01.html
>
> SHOWBIZ TONIGHT
>
> Charlie Sheen Questions Official 9/11 Explanations; "Young and
> Restless" Star Weighs in on Political Topics
>
> Aired March 22, 2006 - 19:00:00 ET
>
> THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM
AND
> MAY BE UPDATED.
>
>
> A.J. HAMMER, CO-HOST: I'm A.J. Hammer in New York City.
> BROOKE ANDERSON, CO-HOST: And I'm Brooke Anderson live in
Hollywood.
> TV's only live entertainment news show starts right now.
>
> (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
>
> HAMMER (voice-over): On SHOWBIZ TONIGHT, we asked you the
question,
> do you hate other people's kids? And we could not believe the
> overwhelming response we got from you: so many e-mails, we're
still
> reading them. Tonight, we bring back the author of "I Hate Other
> People's Kids", so she can respond live to those of you who do
hate
> other people's kids and those who hate her.
>
> Plus, a Charlie Sheen shocker. Tonight, the actor's stunning
> statements on 9/11. Maybe the airplanes did not take down the Twin
> Towers. And maybe the government is covering it all up.
>
> CHARLIE SHEEN, ACTOR: Taking ever four commercial airliners and
> hitting 75 percent of their targets, that feels like a conspiracy
theory.
>
> HAMMER: SHOWBIZ TONIGHT investigates the startling allegations.
>
> Also, a "Da Vinci Code" debate, live. Tonight, what one religious
> group is demanding be done to the "Da Vinci Code" movie, and why
> others believe the demand is downright ridiculous.
>
> UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Witness the biggest cover-up in human history.
>
> HAMMER: SHOWBIZ TONIGHT deciphers the "Da Vinci Code" controversy,
live!
>
> GARTH BROOKS, SINGER: Hey, everybody, I'm Garth Brooks and if it
> happened today, you can bet it's on SHOWBIZ TONIGHT.
>
> (END VIDEOTAPE)
>
> ANDERSON: Hi there, I'm Brooke Anderson, live in Hollywood
>
> HAMMER: I'm A.J. Hammer, live in New York City.
>
> ANDERSON: OK. So last night, we asked you, do you hate other
people's
> kids? And you won't believe how many letters flooded our in-box.
>
> HAMMER: We were virtually overwhelmed with the e-mail and we are
> bringing back the author of "I Hate Other People's Kids" so she
can
> answer e-mails live on the program.
>
> But Brooke, of course, you remember where you were on September 11.
>
> ANDERSON: Absolutely, A.J. I was at work at CNN in Atlanta, and I
> remember being in complete and utter shock and dismay.
>
> HAMMER: Yes, I was workings, as well, here in New York City and
like
> most people just thinking this is absolutely unbelievable.
>
> Well, there's another thing that you may not believe about
September
> 11 and what someone is saying. Charlie Sheen, star of CBS's
> successful sitcom, "Two and a Half Men", says point blank, 9/11,
the
> Pentagon, the World Trade Center, this is all a cover up. Is this
for
> real? Well, SHOWBIZ TONIGHT has the tape that has people asking,
> what's the truth?
>
> (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
>
> SHEEN: The more you look at stuff, especially specific incidents,
> specific events in and around the fateful day, it just -- it just
> raises a lot of questions.
>
> HAMMER (voice-over): Charlie Sheen has his own questions about
9/11,
> and SHOWBIZ TONIGHT has obtained the explosive interview from the
> radio show of fringe journalist Alex Jones.
>
> Sheen normally gets laughs as the bachelor on the hit CBS sitcom,
> "Two and a Half Men".
>
> SHEEN: Wow, you're even better than a dog.
>
> HAMMER: But now, Sheen is courting controversy by questioning the
> official story on 9/11.
>
> SHEEN: We're not the conspiracy theorists on this particular
issue,
> you know. It seems to me like, you know, 19 amateurs with box
cutters
> taking over four commercial airliners and hitting 75 percent of
their
> targets, that feels like a conspiracy theory.
>
> HAMMER: So what exactly are Sheen's questions about 9/11?
>
> For one, Sheen is questioning the official story of what caused
the
> World Trade Center clasp, that the impact of the two planes caused
> fires that weakened the buildings' support columns. In the
interview
> Sheen says he wondered if the buildings could have been brought
down
> by a deliberate - - yes, deliberate -- implosion.
>
> SHEEN: I saw the south tower hit live, that famous wide shot where
it
> disappears behind the building and then we see the tremendous
> fireball. And there was just -- there was a feeling that it just
> didn't look, how do I say this, it didn't look like any commercial
> jetliner I've flown on any time in my life.
>
> And then when the buildings came down, later on that day, I was
with
> my brother and I said, "Hey, call me insane, but did it sort of
look
> like those buildings came down in a -- in a controlled demolition?"
>
> HAMMER: Sheen is also questioning how a commercial airliner could
> have hit the Pentagon.
>
> SHEEN: Show us this incredible maneuvering. Just show it to us.
Just
> show us, you know, how this particular plane pulled off these
> maneuvers. What was it, a 270 degree turn at 500 miles per hour,
> descending 7,000 feet in two and a half minutes, skimming across
tree
> tops the last 500 meters off the ground?
>
> ALEX JONES, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: You can't hold...
>
> HAMMER: Sheen also jumped on a favorite target of 9/11 conspiracy
> theorists: President Bush. Sheen questions why the president,
after
> an aide told him about the attacks, continued with his Florida
school
> appearance.
>
> SHEEN: It would seem to me that, upon the revelation of that news,
> that the Secret Service would grab the president and remove him as
if
> he were on fire from that room.
>
> HAMMER: Ever since that horrible day, conspiracy theories about
the
> attacks have spread far and wide through the Internet. As writer
> Webster Tarpley tells SHOWBIZ TONIGHT, Sheen is not alone in his
opinion.
>
> WEBSTER TARPLEY, AUTHOR, "9/11 SYNTHETIC TERROR": There was a
Zogby
> poll carried out last August, actually August of 2004, by now,
which
> showed that about 50 percent of the people in New York City
believed
> that top government officials had knowledge in advance of what was
> going to happen.
>
> HAMMER: Still, it's safe to say that most experts and most
Americans
> place the blame for 9/11 only on Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, not
> the U.S. government. Even Sheen knows his comments may not go over
> well with many people.
>
> SHEEN: And I'm sure I'm being demonized across the nation by, you
> know, all of the people that do that sort of thing.
>
> (END VIDEOTAPE)
>
> HAMMER: So what exactly should we make about Charlie Sheen's
stunning
> comments? Let's get right into it now. Joining me live from
Chicago
> for the "SHOWBIZ Newsmaker" interview is Nicole Rittenmeyer. She's
> supervising producer of the National Geographic Channel's
miniseries,
> "Inside 9/11." And live in St. Louis, Michael Berger. Michael is
the
> media coordinator of 911Truth.org. It's a group that claims there
has
> been a September 11 cover up.
>
> I want to thank you both for being with me tonight
>
> MICHAEL BERGER, MEDIA COORDINATOR, 911TRUTH.ORG: Thanks for having
me.
>
> NICOLE RITTENMEYER, SUPERVISING PRODUCER, NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC
> CHANNEL'S "INSIDE 9/11": Thanks.
>
> HAMMER: So Michael, I'm one of these people who believes that
anyone
> who takes everything that has been spoon-fed to us by the
government
> from wherever about what happened on 9/11 is being naive. I think
> there is more out there.
>
> When I say this to people sometimes they look at me like I'm kind
of
> nuts. Charlie Sheen must be getting the same reaction, and I'm
sure
> your organization gets that reaction, as well. So what do you say
to
> people who think that maybe what Charlie Sheen is saying here is
just crazy?
>
> BERGER: Well, Charlie Sheen raised several -- I mean first I have
to
> say Charlie Sheen has really done his homework. There's a great
deal,
> an abundance of information out there, and it's hard so to sift
> through what is, in fact, fictitious information and what is based
in fact.
>
> But there is a large body of information out there that
contradicts
> the official story. And Charlie Sheen has clearly done his
homework.
> He raises credible questions, questions that family members have
> raised, that the 9/11 commissioners had promised them would be
> answered in their report, since they didn't answer those questions
in
> the commission hearings.
>
> And when the report came out, Lori Van Auken, one of the Jersey
> girls, a year after the report came out after her analysis of the
> final commission report, she stated that the report actually
raised
> more questions than it had answered.
>
> HAMMER: Nicole, he's bringing up a lot of valid points and Charlie
> Sheen raising issues about a lot of aspects of what happened on
> September 11, so what's your reaction to what he's saying?
>
> RITTENMEYER: Well, I mean I think that the work that his
organization
> has done -- we should be asking questions. Our program, the four-
hour
> mini series we did on 9/11, was the highest rated program ever for
> National Geographic Channel, and that suggests there's a lot of
> interest in this. People need a lot of closure.
>
> And even the 9/11 commissioners didn't say that their report was
the
> final word. I mean, we should be asking questions.
>
> But I think the important question, though, is some of those --
some
> of the issues he's raised are easily answered. He may have done
his
> homework. I don't know that he did enough.
>
> HAMMER: Well, what specifically? What's one of the issues that he
> raised that you're finding issue with?
>
> RITTENMEYER: The demolition of the buildings.
>
> HAMMER: Which Charlie Sheen claims -- which Charlie Sheen claims
> appeared to be a controlled implosion.
>
> RITTENMEYER: Sure.
>
> HAMMER: That wouldn't have happened coming from airplanes simply
> hitting the building.
>
> RITTENMEYER: Absolutely. And it did. It did happen. The
fireproofing
> was blown off the building. There's been tons of research. There's
a
> wealth of evidence out there that suggests -- it's been examined
and
> re-examined. It looked to untrained people like a controlled
> demolition, but experts have evaluated this again and again and
> again, and it's pretty self-explanatory.
>
> HAMMER: Michael, you did mention that you were impressed with how
> well informed Charlie Sheen is and the fact that he did do his
> homework, which I imagine for an organization like yours, which
wants
> people to ask the hard questions, has to be a good thing. He's not
> just another Hollywood type simply spouting his mouth off.
>
> BERGER: No, like I said, Charlie has really done his homework and
has
> been really impressive. In fact, Charlie raises the issue of a
third
> building, a 47-story building, building seven, which collapsed at
> 5:20 p.m. on September 11, which was not hit by an airplane.
>
> So what we're asking for is if this third building collapsed at
5:20,
> which the media really has not shown this clip. They -- they show
us
> the towers being impacted by planes and the fireballs and the
> collapse over and over, but this third building with an
inexplicable
> collapse, although it did have minor fires, no steel frame
skyscraper
> has ever collapsed due to fire.
>
> We had a fire in the Madrid Windsor tower last year, burned for 20
> hours, a raging inferno. The people of Madrid assumed, like 9/11,
> this tower was going to collapse, and yet it didn't.
>
> HAMMER: Michael, do you think there's been a huge government cover-

> up, as Charlie Sheen is alleging, on September 11?
>
> BERGER: I do. I do. I think many of the commissioners themselves
have
> had conflicts of interest. They did not follow the investigations
to
> where a truly independent commission, which is what Charlie Sheen
has
> called for, truly independent voices raising questions, calling on
> the government to release information like Pentagon surveillance
> videotapes, videotapes from the Sheraton Hotel and the Citgo gas
station.
>
> Evidence about the black boxes located at Ground Zero, which a
> firefighter had stated prior to the 9/11 Commission report coming
out in 2004.
>
> HAMMER: Michael, I've got to jump in real quick, because Nicole, I
do
> want to ask you. You did mention that it is important that we're
> asking these questions. Charlie Sheen now, a Hollywood type on
board,
> raising these issues publicly. Before it's been mostly official
type
> people. So do you think it will at least give some of these
theories legs?
>
> RITTENMEYER: Oh, gosh, I hope not. I hope it -- I hope it causes
> people to start reading a little bit more and researching the
issue.
>
> BERGER: Hopefully.
>
> RITTENMEYER: If you delve into the research a lot this of
answerable.
>
> HAMMER: Well, hopefully, people will start trying to get more
> informed, because I think there are a lot of unanswered questions.
> Michael Berger and Nicole Rittenmeyer, thank you for joining us on
> SHOWBIZ TONIGHT.
>
> BERGER: Thank you.
>
> RITTENMEYER: Thank you.
>
> ======
> March 23, 2006
>
> SHOWBIZ TONIGHT
>
> Sheen 9/11 Comments Spark Controversy; Investigators Unraveling
> Mystery of Princess Diana's Death; Students Spend Spring Break
> Helping Out ; ABC's "Extreme Makeover" Remakes Town Devastated by
> Katrina; "Rolling Stone" Goes Behind The Scenes with "American
Idol";
> Growing Phenomenon of the Office Spouse
>
> Aired March 23, 2006 - 19:00:00 ET
>
> THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM
AND
> MAY BE UPDATED.
>
>
> A.J. HAMMER, CO-HOST: New information about the death of Princess
> Diana. I'm A.J. Hammer in New York.
> BROOKE ANDERSON, CO-HOST: I'm Brooke Anderson in Hollywood. And a
> look at a workplace phenomenon, the office spouse. TV's only live
> entertainment news show starts right now.
>
> (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
>
> HAMMER (voice-over): On SHOWBIZ TONIGHT, Charlie Sheen speaks out
on
> a controversial theory that the government covered up what really
> happened on 9/11.
>
> CHARLIE SHEEN, ACTOR: Taking over four commercial airliners and
> hitting 75 percent of their targets. That feels like a conspiracy
theory.
>
> HAMMER: Tonight, we dig even deeper. The host of the radio show on
> which Sheen leveled his startling allegations joins us live right
> here on SHOWBIZ TONIGHT. Plus, the overwhelming response from you,
the viewers.
>
> Rebuilding communities devastated by Hurricane Katrina. Tonight,
how
> a TV reality show is going in to fix what some say the government
could not.
>
> HARRY CONNICK JR., SINGER/ACTOR: I'm Harry Connick Jr. If it
happened
> today, it's on SHOWBIZ TONIGHT.
>
> (END VIDEOTAPE)
>
> HAMMER: Hello, I'm A.J. Hammer, live in New York City.
>
> ANDERSON: And I'm Brooke Anderson, live in Hollywood.
>
> A.J., it's been incredible. Pretty hard to believe, actually, the
> response we got today to the incredible story SHOWBIZ TONIGHT
broke
> last night. Actor Charlie Sheen's startling claims that the
> government may be covering up what really happened on September 11.
>
> HAMMER: So many e-mails coming in. We've been really overwhelmed
> today. Between the e-mails, the blogs, the web sites, everybody is
> writing and talking about it.
>
> Charlie Sheen made the comments during a hard-to-believe interview
on
> a radio show. And don't move because in just a moment the host of
the
> radio show, the guy who actually spoke with Sheen, is going to
join
> me live here on SHOWBIZ TONIGHT. But first let's get you up to
speed
> on the latest developments.
>
> (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
>
> SHEEN: The more you look at stuff, especially specific incidents,
> specific events, in or around the fateful day, it just-- it just
> raises a lot of questions.
>
> HAMMER: The questions Charlie Sheen is raising about the 9/11
attacks
> are raising a lot of eyebrows. Our e-mail inbox immediately
started
> to overflow. And the coverage on SHOWBIZ TONIGHT is getting a lot
of attention.
>
> The web site 9/11 Blogger calls SHOWBIZ TONIGHT's coverage, quote,
> "The first time a major news station has covered 9/11 questions in
> any reasonable format."
>
> It all started with a radio interview Sheen gave to GCN Radio
Network
> host Alex Jones, a cult hero of sorts to 9/11 conspiracy
theorists.
> During the interview, Sheen made clear that he backs Jones' views.
>
> SHEEN: We're not the conspiracy theorists on this particular
issue.
> It seems to me like, you know, 19 amateurs with box cutters taking
> over four commercial airliners and hitting 75 percent of their
> targets, that feels like a conspiracy theory.
>
> HAMMER: Sheen also made another shocking suggestion: that we may
not
> know the full story about the collapse of the World Trade Center.
>
> SHEEN: I have a hard time believing that a fireball traveled down
the
> elevator over 110 feet and still had the explosive energy to
destroy
> the lobby like it was described.
>
> I said, "Hey, call me insane. But did it sort of look like those
> buildings came down in a controlled demolition?"
>
> If I was your age, I could only dream about my parents splitting
up.
>
> HAMMER: As the star of the sitcom "Two and a Half Men," Sheen is
seen
> weekly by about 10 million people. And many of them may end up
paying
> attention to his controversial comments about 9/11.
>
> (END VIDEOTAPE)
>
> HAMMER: As I mentioned the radio host who interviewed Sheen is
Alex
> Jones of the Genesis Communications Network. Alex joins me live
from
> Austin, Texas, to talk about Sheen's riveting comments.
>
> Alex, as I mentioned, the response that we got from doing this
story
> last night absolutely shocking. So I want to know how it actually
all
> came about. How did the interview with Charlie Sheen actually
happen?
> Did you guys reach out to him? Did he call you? What was the deal?
>
> ALEX JONES, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Well, just to make something
clear,
> Mr. Sheen has amazing courage to do what he's done. And he
contacted
> me. He's been watching my documentaries for years. He's one of the
> most informed people that I've talked to in Hollywood on this
subject.
>
> Listen, for years Hollywood's been on fire with people knowing the
> truth about 9/11. And I was the first to expose 9/11 on the day.
In
> fact two months before I had intel that elements of the military
> industrial complex were going to carry out the attack. I said
they'll
> use bin Laden, the known CIS. That is their patsy to take the
blame
> for attacking the towers.
>
> So Mr. Sheen is only exceptional in that he has courage in going
> public. Courage that no one else in Hollywood had.
>
> I mean, here's a CNN poll from Anderson Cooper a year and a half
ago
> where they said is the government covering up 9/11? Could they be
> involved? Ninety percent when the poll closed on CNN said this.
>
> So listen I have my own syndicated show. I've done 4,000 radio
> interviews in the last 4 1/2 years. Almost no one calls in and
> disagrees now. We have the majority view and we have the evidence.
>
> And bottom line, there are declassified U.S. government documents
> like Operation Northwoods that ABC News reported on back in 2000.
> Operation Northwoods. Google it.
>
> And in there the U.S. government -- an element of it -- said we
want
> to hi-jack jets by remote control, crash them and blame it on the
> Soviet Union in Cuba. Now that was decades ago. This is why we
believe this.
>
> Then you look at the official story. The firefighters, the police,
> hundreds of them saying there were bomb in the buildings. They
were
> told to shut up. You look at building seven, detonators going off.
> You can see the explosion.
>
> HAMMER: And Alex, a lot of this is what Charlie Sheen was
covering.
> I'm actually just curious. Did he reach out to you guys? Is he the
> one who put the call into you and how he wound up on your show?
>
> JONES: Sure. Sure. He called me a few weeks ago and said that --
said
> that he loves this country. He has nothing to gain from this. In
fact
> it's dangerous for him to do.
>
> HAMMER: Sure, sure.
>
> JONES: He said, "I love this country and my kids so much that I'm
> going to do this, Alex."
>
> And I said, "God bless you" because now it makes for other
Hollywood
> people who've got major pull who know the truth to start going
public.
>
> HAMMER: And dangerous indeed to do. Because a lot of what he said
> makes a lot of people sort of sit back and say, "Whoa, I don't
know
> about that."
>
> And what's really important here. You may not agree with
everything
> that Charlie Sheen had to say. I personally think it's a good
thing
> that he did go on your show, so he could go public with his point
of
> view. Because it does get people talking.
>
> You know, there are a lot of people who may look at this, however,
> and say there just goes another Hollywood nut job shooting off his
mouth.
>
> JONES: Listen -- listen...
>
> HAMMER: I imagine that you think, though, having a Hollywood actor
on
> your side is a good thing and, as you mention, may bring some more
> people to the table talking about this.
>
> JONES: Sure, sure. If you knew some of the Hollywood names that
are
> aware of 9/11. We're talking some of the biggest people.
>
> HAMMER: Any you can tell us about that you've been in contact with?
>
> JONES: No, I can't. Because -- because people in Hollywood contact
me
> because I have integrity, and I've been in a few films and they
know
> me. And they know I keep my mouth shut.
>
> You know, it was kind of like back in high school. I learned to
keep
> my mouth shut about girls I was dating and all the girls started
liking you.
>
> Look, it's really simple. Let's understand this, OK? Nine-eleven
was
> an inside job. It was a self-inflicted wound. And -- and what
Charlie
> Sheen is doing is just amazing, and he can only be commended for
it.
> And all he's calling for is a real investigation.
>
> I go further at InfoWars.com and PrisonPlanet.com. We lay out how
it
> happened and what took place.
>
> And it's not just Charlie Sheen I've interviewed. CNN has
interviewed
> some of these people, the only network that I've seen doing it.
You
> guys have interviewed. There have been physics professors that
have
> gone public. There have been the heads of mining colleges that
have
> gone public.
>
> George Bush Sr.'s top CIA adviser who briefed him and Ronald
Reagan,
> one of the highest little guys at the CIA, says our government is
> clearly involved in carrying out terror to blame it on foreign
enemies.
>
> Did you know that on CIA.gov they admit that they carried out
terror
> attacks in 1953 to blame it on Mohammed Mozadek (ph) in Iran as a
> pretext to overthrow Iran?
>
> HAMMER: Alex -- I'm going to rein -- all good stuff and all stuff
> that needs to be talked about. But I'm going to rein you back in
here
> to the topic at hand.
>
> JONES: Sure.
>
> HAMMER: One thing that I think is interesting. You know, as I
> mentioned we've gotten this overwhelming response. The e-mail has
not
> stopped coming in. Most of the e-mail I've been getting has been
> supporting the fact that we are bringing attention to something
that
> is rarely talked about in mainstream media.
>
> JONES: Yes, sir. You have courage. No one else has done what
you're doing.
>
> HAMMER: And I appreciate you saying that. So the question is why?
Why
> have so many of the major media outlets not talked about these
> alternative theories that exist behind 9/11? Why is that?
>
> JONES: Mark Twain said that, "In the beginning a patriot is a
scarce
> man, hated and feared and scorned. But in time when his cause
> succeeds, the timid join him, because then it costs nothing to be
patriot."
>
> A lot of people don't have the courage that you have, A.J. A lot
of
> people don't have the courage of Charlie Sheen. They don't have
the
> courage of the German defense minister, Andre Van Bulow (ph), who
two
> years ago went public...
>
> HAMMER: What do you think is afraid of that's going to happen to
them?
>
> JONES: They're afraid of being beaten up by the hordes of neocon
> intimidators who try to go out there with their Gestapo Nazi
tactics
> to try to bludgeon everybody with their blogs and radio shows to
shut up.
>
> But they've lost, pal, because people have learned that they're a
> bunch of liars. They lied about WMDs. They lied about everything.
And
> now their credibility is totally blown.
>
> The new White House memo just came out where Bush is talking about
> staging the shoot down of American planes to get -- to blame it on
> Saddam. That's public. That's admitted.
>
> HAMMER: Let's talk about some public documents. Because obviously
> experts, government commissions, countless officials have all come
> out and supported what is the official line.
>
> JONES: Yes, they call it Henry Kissinger independent.
>
> HAMMER: Right. Well, we know that those documents are out there
and
> that people are supporting them. So I guess what some people
watching
> us tonight may be thinking is, well, why the heck should I be
> listening to Charlie Sheen or to Alex Jones and his web site on
this matter?
>
> JONES: They shouldn't. They shouldn't. They shouldn't believe me.
> They shouldn't believe you. They shouldn't believe George Bush.
They
> shouldn't believe the Keane Commission where almost the entire
> commission has conflicts of interest and was appointed by Bush.
> You've got to love this. He appoints his own commission, and then
the
> media calls it independent.
>
> Did you know that the "9/11 Whitewash Commission" claims there
were
> no columns in tower one and two when they had 47 of the biggest
> columns in the world up until that time? They won't say why
building
> seven had blast points going off down the side.
>
> HAMMER: Well, Alex -- Alex, I'm afraid I've got to cut you off
> because we're out of time. But as I said, it's sparking debate.
It's
> getting people talking. And I appreciate you help bringing it up.
>
> JONES: Thank you. Go to InfoWars.com, sir. Find out the truth at
> PrisonPlanet.com.
>
> HAMMER: Alex Jones, live from Austin.
>
> And as I mentioned we've gotten so many e-mails on the subject.
We'll
> read what some of you have to say coming up a bit later in the
show.
>
> Nine eleven also happens to be the subject of a new movie that's
> coming out in theaters soon. And SHOWBIZ TONIGHT has your first
look
> at "United 93." That's coming up in a bit in the "SHOWBIZ
Showcase."
>
> ANDERSON: Plus, rebuilding communities devastated by Hurricane
> Katrina. Tonight how a TV reality show is going in to fix what
some
> say the government could not.
>
> (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
>
> UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm going to get the door for you, like I
always do.
>
> UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you.
>
> (END VIDEO CLIP)
>
> HAMMER: Office spouses. Until desks do us part. In sickness and in
> health plans. SHOWBIZ TONIGHT investigates the phenomenon that's
all
> the buzz in the media. Is it OK to have a real wife and a work
wife?
>
> (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
>
> HAMMER: Welcome back to SHOWBIZ TONIGHT. I am A.J. Hammer. You are
> watching TV's only live entertainment news show.
>
> We have gotten a tremendous response to the story that we brought
you
> on Charlie Sheen's comments about 9/11. We do want to keep hearing
> from you. It is our SHOWBIZ TONIGHT question of the day. Charlie
> Sheen speaks out. Do you agree there is a government cover-up of
9/11?
>
> Let's see the votes so far: 65 percent of you say yes; 35 percent
of
> you say no, you don't.
>
> A couple of the e-mails we've received include one from Dylan in
> Texas, who writes, "There are so many unanswered questions, and
all
> attempts at an investigation have been stonewalled by the
government."
>
> We also heard from Mike in Hawaii, who writes, "How could any sane
> person believe that our government attacked our own people?"
>
> Do keep voting at CNN.com/SHOWBIZTONIGHT. You want to e-mail us
more
> of your thoughts, we want to hear from you at ShowbizTonight@...
> Those e-mails coming up later in the show.
>
> ANDERSON: In tonight's "SHOWBIZ Showcase" we've got your first
look
> at the movie "United 93." The film is a real-time account of what
> happened on the fourth plane to be hijacked on September 11.
>
> Heroic passengers fought back against the terrorists and spared
what
> might have been the intended target, the White House. Take a look.
>
> (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
>
> UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Welcome aboard United Flight 93. We're flying
to
> San Francisco.
>
> UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Runway is clear.
>
> UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Runway clear for take-off.
>
> United 93. United 93. United 93.
>
> UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hello?
>
> UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Honey, it's me. My flight has been hi-jacked.
>
> UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Two planes into the World Trade Center. We have
to
> shoot that thing down.
>
> UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Oh my God. I think we're heading to
Washington.
>
> UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We have to do something.
>
> UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We're running out of time.
>
> UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He's going to do something stupid.
>
> UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There are a bunch of us here.
>
> UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Take him down.
>
> UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We are going to take back the cockpit.
>
> UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I have to go. They're about to storm the
> cockpit. I love you.
>
> (END VIDEOTAPE)
>
> ANDERSON: "United 93" will be in theaters next month.
>
> HAMMER: So just when you thought the case might have been closed
on
> Princess Diana's fatal car crash, there are some surprising new
> revelations and shocking questions surrounding her death. SHOWBIZ
> TONIGHT now goes around the world to get you the very latest.
>
> [Interesting timing, the Diana story, with the theory she was
killed
> to avoid a liaison with her Egyptian Muslim boyfriend. Looks like
> this is all part of a counter-offensive against the neo-cons....]
>

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 6
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 06:32:59 -0000
From: "mojo_j_2000" <mojo_j_2000@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: McBride: Why the Official Story on 9/11 is Going to Collapse

LIKE AN ANTARCTIC ICEFLOW

HEY CHARLIE GIVE LOOSECHANGE911 A SHOUTOUT

--- In 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com, "Dick Eastman" <olfriend@...>
wrote:
>
> From: Sean McBride
>
>
> March 23, 2006
>
>
> Why the Official Story on 9/11 is Going to Collapse
>
> The official story on 9/11 is so absurd and ridiculous on its
face, in so many different but consistent ways, that one would have
to have a room temperature IQ to believe it. The story is
indefensible because whatever group that was behind this operation
severely bungled the job, in ways which make the Lavon Affair, the
USS Liberty attack and Iran-Contra look relatively like works of
genius.
>
> In fair and open debate on the Internet, the official story has
been thoroughly demolished. Defenders of the official story for the
most part are now afraid to raise their heads, and have been sent
running for the tall grass. Only a single force is holding the
official story in place: brutal and systematic censorship by the
mainstream media of discussion of nearly all aspects of 9/11.
Eventually we are going to see an open revolt from within the
journalistic establishment by people with better than room
temperature IQs who can no longer bear the bullshit being promoted
by the tiny cabal of billionaires which owns CNN, MSNBC, Fox News,
the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal and
the rest of the thoroughly discredited mainstream media.
>
> The cabal which is protecting the official lies about 9/11 is the
very same cabal which drove America into the disastrous Iraq War.
The collapse of the war effort in Iraq will help foster the collapse
of the official story on 9/11. The individuals behind these crimes
have placed themselves in a perilous position. Committing further
crimes -- including a nuclear 9/11 Part II -- will only make their
position much worse. No member of the American power elite and
national security community who is sane will want to have anything
to do with any more of their bright ideas, and will be on a maximum
state of alert to prevent them from committing further damage.
>
> What would be a suitable punishment for crimes of this magnitude?
Perhaps a group public hanging on international television?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> / / /
>

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 7
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 06:39:05 -0000
From: "mojo_j_2000" <mojo_j_2000@yahoo.com>
Subject: COASTTOCOAST DRUDGE AP

LEE K COMMIECHINK TO XRAY US PORTS...NOT JUST COSCO LONG BEACH...

IMPEACH CHIMPY...

START HERE http://democrats.com/senate-censure

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 8
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 06:40:40 -0000
From: "mojo_j_2000" <mojo_j_2000@yahoo.com>
Subject: MUSTER A FIRING SQUAD

HAVE FRENCHIES THROW THINGS IN HIS DIRECTION

V FOR VENDETTA

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 9
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 22:41:33 -0800 (PST)
From: Kevin Hammond <sir_oglaigh@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Zionist Domination

I think that you very well KNOW that you aint gotta apologise to ME at least. I have probably been the fowlest mouth on this group! LOL! I think that under the circumstances it is MORE THAN appropriate. But then again, I have a bit of a sordid past and pretty much grew up on the streets.

Kevin

Naveed <flanker12k@yahoo.com> wrote:
that's the beauty of people working individually, we become a dreaded hydra for the elite to battle! or a horde of angry hornets defending their nest each with an individualistic sting! The anesthesia is wearing off and the giant is awakening, realizing we've been DUPED! I think what the inbred/satanist asshats will try is to deflect all that anger of the masses onto shrub co and save their own skin. Remember this fuxor is a figurehead of the cabal from alice in wonderland. The hapsburgs/rothschilds/queen of england/and other motherfuckers i forgot about have lost the initiative and will lose the war. again we ain't out of the woods yet


ps. sorry for the foul-mouthed language i used.

Kevin Hammond <sir_oglaigh@yahoo.com> wrote:
Ok I wont be quite so dissappointed now. LMAO!

Jolly Roger <slicingthroats@yahoo.com> wrote: Don't be disappointed -- it's only another angle (I didn't even see it yet) -- and your efforts are paying off. 9-11 truth is now mainstream conversation, thanks to you, and everyone like you that helped the movement over the years. Charlie Sheen wouldn't be speaking out today if we didn't make it safe for him to do so. He's only speaking out publically now because we put the doubt of the official story in everyone's mind, and made it socially acceptable to question these events.

Kevin Hammond <sir_oglaigh@yahoo.com> wrote: In regards to the Rothschilds, They are KNOWN as the vaticans accountants/bankers/book keepers. And i am very diddappointed in loosechange2. Nowhere NEAR enough focus on the wtc. And a bit much on 93 and the pentagon. While i commend them for stepping up to the plate, For someone that has been bustin his ass on this for almost 2 years, It is dissappointing.

Kevin

Kevin Hammond <sir_oglaigh@yahoo.com> wrote:
There has been a SUCCESSION of popes that it have publicly and openly stated that the Constitution are SATANIC DOCUMENTS! This statement in and OF itself is not only anti American, But also ANTICHRISTIAN! we now have a NAZI POPE telling gw bush that we should not prosecute pedophile priests!

Kevin Hammond <sir_oglaigh@yahoo.com> wrote: PLEASE look into the JESUIT ORDER! They and the Zionists are working in tandem together! And i reitterate! PLEASE get the book the Secret Terrorists by Bill Hughes! He will send you a copy for a couple dollars! Rome and zionism are pervert lovers.

kitty285 <kitty285@charter.net> wrote: Hey Jolly Roger,i agree with you 100%,there could not be any other
explanation for the things that have been happening,i have come to that same
conclusion myself,makes me sick !!! I fear we must have a Revolution
soon,for one thing i do not think that they would permit a female president
be in the Freemasons...Kitty
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jolly Roger" <slicingthroats@yahoo.com>
To: <911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 7:24 PM
Subject: Re: [911TruthAction] Zionist Domination

> Kevin -- I'm beginning to think the Zionists ARE the New Word Order, and
they're going to set up their HQ in Israel after they're done sucking our
nation dry financially, militarily, and environmentally (resources).
They're running the whitle house, the pentagon, the courts, churches, the
media and the money. They're getting ready to pull the plug on the good ol'
USA, leave us all out to dry, and set up shop in Israel, with probably one
of the Rothschilds as their messiah.
> The Rothschild family -- (Fed Reserve, and inummerable other central
banks world wide) founded many masonic lodges, and had the masons
infiltrated with zionists before the French Revolution (which revolution.
like ours, was at least partially funded by Rothschild money) They're the
tie between the masons that have always ruled this country, and the zionists
that control it now.
>
> Kevin Hammond <sir_oglaigh@yahoo.com> wrote:
> This is GREAT! But Zionism is only ONE of the major tools of the
illuminati/New World Order. And hey Jolly! Whatever happened to the gz
flyers?! They are gone from the files section. I have woken a lot of
people UP with those! And when are you gonna come out MY WAY?! I got a
spot fer ya at my pad. Allbeit a small one.
>
> Jolly Roger <slicingthroats@yahoo.com> wrote: This is an excellent
site to find out more about Zionism, it's grip on America, and it's plan to
rule us all, if we're allowed to live. There are some excellent (and very
revealing) interviews you should listen to. The threat of zionism is the
bigger picture of 9-11 truth --- it gets worse.
>
> http://iamthewitness.com/
>
>
>
>
> "There comes a time when every man feels the urge to spit on his hands,
hoist the black flag, and start slitting throats." -- H.L. Mencken
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Mail
> Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Mail
> Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.
>
> ---------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>
> Visit your group "911TruthAction" on the web.
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> 911TruthAction-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
> "There comes a time when every man feels the urge to spit on his hands,
hoist the black flag, and start slitting throats." -- H.L. Mencken
>
> ---------------------------------
> New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC for low,
low rates.

---------------------------------
New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC for low, low rates.

---------------------------------
New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC for low, low rates.

---------------------------------
Blab-away for as little as 1¢/min. Make PC-to-Phone Calls using Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.

"There comes a time when every man feels the urge to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and start slitting throats." -- H.L. Mencken
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.

---------------------------------
New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big.

In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot.
- Notebook, 1904 __________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

Visit your group "911TruthAction" on the web.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
911TruthAction-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

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

---------------------------------
New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC for low, low rates.

[This message contained attachments]

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 10
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 06:48:36 -0000
From: "mojo_j_2000" <mojo_j_2000@yahoo.com>
Subject: It's criminal

Posted by Scott Ritter at 9:59 AM on March 20, 2006.

Impeachment is the only recourse that can bring a halt to the madness
in Iraq, and the insanity being planned in Iran and elsewhere.

http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/ritter/33788/

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 11
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 06:58:35 -0000
From: "mojo_j_2000" <mojo_j_2000@yahoo.com>
Subject: Silverstein can’t get it up

Why Larry Silverstein can't get it up

By Jerry Mazza
gvmaz@verizon.net
Online Journal Contributing Writer
Mar 21, 2006, 01:10

No, it's not a job for Viagra, trust me. But some good fresh
investors
would help. Governor Pataki and Mayor Bloomberg have told
Silverstein
to get up the $2.3 billion Freedom Tower, at least make a start,
by next month or "move out of the way."
This means Silverstein, who holds the lease for the World Trade
Center
site, would have to turn over control of building the new tower
and a second building to the Port Authority of New York and New
Jersey,
the site's owners.
After all, it's been more than four years and Larry hasn't gotten it
up.
Que pasa?
On the other hand, he's gotten up his new Tower 7,
to replace the old one he had actually owned.

But this T 7 is bigger and better than ever, 52 floors not 47.
You know, sometimes you just have to be in the mood.
Larry actually ordered his original Tower 7 "pulled" seven hours
after Towers 1and 2 came down. He claimed there was so much
fire damage in this redundant, steel-framed 47-floor building that
before it fell and caused any more pain, he would "pull it."
And so it was done.
The trouble is you don't just "pull it." It takes weeks to rig a
building
with charges and heavy explosives at all the vital structural
points.
Then, you can "pull it" and POW! It'll come down in 10 seconds,
just like the redundant steel-framed Towers 1 and 2,
and at the speed of gravity, into a neat footprint of its free-fall.

Tower 7 also left molten steel and somewhat evaporated steel
members,
although the fire was nothing compared to Towers 1 and 2.
Maybe it wasn't fire that melted them, but high power explosives.
Ya never know, as we say in New York.
Also Tower 7 happened to house the Secret Service's largest field
office,
over 200 employees and as Michael Ruppert suggests some of the
devices that guided the liners into the buildings. 7 also housed the
IRS,
the SEC (with thousands of Wall Street scam case files in it),
the FBI, CIA, and Rudy Giuliani's Control Center.
They were evacuated for the most part.

Tower 7 did take with it oft-stymied Osama hunter John O'Neill,
the ex-Terror Head who quit the FBI after 30 yeas in disgust.
He was the same John O'Neil just appointed head of WTC security.
Aren't these amazing coincidences, one right after another,
like cutter charges, boom boom boom boom boom, as the firemen
described occurring in Towers 1 and 2, along with two huge
explosions each,
one from the basement, and one from the top of each tower?

But I digress. Lucky Larry and the Silverstein Group leased the WTC
from the PA for $3.2 billion for 99 years, a sweetheart deal if
ever.
They also had the prescience to ramp the insurance to $3.55 billion
just weeks before 9/11, including coverage for terror attacks.
After the catastrophe, Silverstein's lawyers had the bright idea to
ask
for $7.1 billion, saying the two hits (within minutes of each other)
constituted two separate acts. What beauties.

In fact, Larry was joyful at the thought of rebuilding under these
terms.
That was his thing. And he would get the WTC up
bigger and better than ever, with a $9 billion tab.
Trouble In Silverstein City
Where things start to come apart for Larry-boy is with those pesky
insurance companies, who barely like to pay what they owe you,
let alone what you're padding. After two years of Larry's
Silverstein
group haggling in court with multiple insurers, spending a million
bucks
on lawyers, the judge turned and said, sorry fellas,
it was one hit, you get 3.5 billion, period. Now, get outa here!

Some $700 million got cut off the top for one of Larry's lenders,
GMAC, the retail leaseholder. Then there's a $125 million rent tab
coming up from the Port of Authority in July. And money was spent
on cleaning things up plus infrastructure costs.
Net net, he's left with some $2.9 billion, maybe even less,
who knows for sure. I mean, poor baby, he's not hurting
like all those people who lost their jobs or worse lost their lives,
but he's gotta get it up, $2.3 billion and the Freedom Tower.
And people are saying he doesn't have the jack.

Also, the Port of Authority would like a chunk of the insurance
money.
So Larry is scrambling to put things together. He sounds like
an angst-ridden Woody Allen in a double-breasted suit,
with a slicked-back parted haircut.
Yet inside, the guy's pure steel, like one of the Towers.
When he finally had a deal with the Port of Authority, he threw a
set
of new demands on the table that scuttled the bargaining.

Larry assumed he had Pataki "over a barrel" because he holds the
lease.
But George, like his namesake, is an ambitious man with his eye
on the White House. He doesn't want to leave a mess behind in New
York. Negotiations stopped. It's get it up or get out.
The Dark Past of the World Trade Center
An equally dark history shadows the old World Trade Center.
In a brilliant article "The Process of Creating a Ruin," from
Business Week,
there's an excerpt from Eric Darton's book Divided We Stand.
The excerpt is called, "What the Twin Trade Towers Stood For."

In it, Darton describes the difficulties of the World Trade Center
after the first bombing in 1993, a story in and of itself. In fact,
I've always been amazed that the immense blast happened at 12:18
local time in the Secret Service's section of the car park under
New York's tallest. That aside, Darton says . . .

"From an economic standpoint, the trade center -- subsidized
since its inception -- has never functioned, nor was it intended to
function,
unprotected in the rough-and-tumble real estate marketplace.
And in the thirty years since it was built, the social forces of
which
it remains so highly visible an artifact have definitively
realigned."

Darton goes on to say that the WTC in 1993 at 20 years old
had really just begun cranking out enough income to meet the ongoing
losses the Port of Authority incurred to run the PATH commuter line.

WTC office space had topped out price-wise. A new generation of
cyber-smart buildings, with bigger built-in electrical capacity, had
quietly surpassed it.
Also, with the bombing came a $700 million hit for repairs.
But the Port Authority, unlike a commercial landlord, did have a
$2.6 billion annual budget and the right to generate cash
through bonds, tolls, fares, and airport tariffs.

The PA could afford to rebuild the WTC and do needed renovations.
But then there's another assault on the institution's integrity.
Darton points out that, in the 1990s,
"Privatization emerged as one of the key political strategies
of the early Pataki, Whitman, and Giuliani administrations
as they faced widening budget gaps, shrinking federal assistance,
and reduced local tax revenues.
"Imitating their corporate counterparts, they embraced the belief
that
Govt. functions should be reduced to a series of inexorable bottom
lines.

This new standard became the basis
for a sweeping reevaluation of public agencies.
They would be judged not by their objective performance level
or their contribution to the public good but according to whether
their disassembled parts might profitably be sold, merged, or
eliminated.
"Discussing the disposition of the Port Authority's bus terminal,
Charles Gargano, Governor Pataki's appointee to the PA's
vice chairmanship and the head of New York State's economic
development agency, put the issue succinctly when he asked, '

Why not let private industry in to develop what is clearly
an extremely valuable property?'"
So it's the wolf howl of the free marketer, privatization.
Where have I heard that before?
Don't analyze, criticize, amortize, socialize -- just privatize!
It's like the privatization model Darton describes
as designed for the District of Columbia,
referring to residents and visitors as "customers,"
and government duties split into "wholesale" and "retail" categories.

It's like that senior editor writing in the 1998 Wall Street Journal
who urged the Republican Party to "view itself very much like,
let's say, a corporation, A Daimler-Benz, A Chrysler . . .
to change its corporate culture [and] go through a wrenching
transformation, because the cars are coming back from the lot
unsold."
In short, the World Trade Center was now a piece of meat
on the free market selling block.

And the Port of Authority stopped being a public institution
designed to meet the New York region's socio-economic needs.
The PA turns into an amalgam of assets to be cut up
according to market's appetites.
"Capturing" the maximum value of each piece is based simply on
"dismembering the whole." Badaboom! I can hear them now.

WTC Needed Repair in 2001

Larry Silverstein and friends knew all this. Especially that the
Towers
needed some $200 million in renovations and improvements,
mostly related to removal and/or replacement of building materials
declared health hazards since the Towers were built.

WTC was labeled an "asbestos bombshell."
In fact, the Port Authority thought of WTC as a dinosaur, trying
several times to get permits to demolish the buildings for liability
reasons.

The PA was turned down. The asbestos problem was no secret.
The sole reason the complex was still up till 9/11 was the cost
of taking the Twin Towers down floor by floor.

Especially since the PA was prohibited by law from demolishing
the buildings. Got that? Demolishing prohibited by law
but doable by an act of god or godlessness.
Other developers had gone broke by the mandated renovations.
Two hundred million dollars were an entire year's revenue
from the Trade Towers.

So the 9/11 collapse of the Twin Towers
was the final solution, so to speak.
The November 22, 2003, New York Times reported that under
a pending agreement a developer and his investors will get back
most of the down payment that they made to lease
the World Trade Center just six weeks before a terrorist attack
destroyed the twin towers.

Developer Larry Silverstein and investors Lloyd Goldman
and Joseph Cayre are nearing a deal that would give them
about $98 million of their original investment of $125 million.
That's a helluva refund.
September 11 reduced renovation to Ground Zero.
So now Silverstein could rebuild funded by insurance coverage that
miraculously covered acts of terrorism. Filing two claims was the
capper.

But, as the CIA would say, there was a little blowback.
Larry only got back the one-hit payola, with a lot of expenses,
though still considerable profit, but obviously leaving a shortfall
for the $2.3 billion tower, not to mention the $9 billion complex.

But hey, that's privatization for you, the old unseen hand scraping
the skin off somebody's back for a buck, in this case Larry's.
It's no wonder he can't get it up. He's got a lot on his mind,
not to mention 2,700 lost souls.

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 12
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 07:10:52 -0000
From: "mojo_j_2000" <mojo_j_2000@yahoo.com>
Subject: A Boeing 757 did not hit the Pentagon......maybe an A-3

A Boeing 757 did not hit the Pentagon
by Michael Meyer, Mechanical Engineer
To the members of the Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-Eleven:

I would like to give you my input as to the events on September 11,
and why it is a physically provable fact that some of the damage
done to the Pentagon could not have occurred from a Boeing 757
impact, and therefore the 9/11 Commission report is not complete and
arguably a cover-up. I will not speculate about what may have been
covered up, I will only speak from my professional opinion. But I
will explain why I do not believe the Pentagon was hit by a Boeing
757.

I am a Mechanical Engineer who spent many years in Aerospace,
including structural design, and in the design, and use of shaped
charge explosives (like those that would be used in missile
warheads).

The structural design of a large aircraft like a 757 is based around
managing the structural loads of a pressurized vessel, the cabin, to
near-atmospheric conditions while at the lower pressure region of
cruising altitudes, and to handle the structural and aerodynamic
loads of the wings, control surfaces, and the fuel load. It is made
as light as possible, and is certainly not made to handle impact
loads of any kind.

If a 757 were to strike a reinforced concrete wall, the energy from
the speed and weight of the aircraft will be transferred, in part
into the wall, and to the structural failure of the aircraft. It is
not too far of an analogy as if you had an empty aluminum can,
traveling at high speed hitting a reinforced concrete wall. The
aluminum can would crumple (the proper engineering term is buckle)
and, depending on the structural integrity of the wall, crack,
crumble or fail completely. The wall failure would not be a neat
little hole, as the energy of the impact would be spread throughout
the wall by the reinforcing steel.

This is difficult to model accurately, as any high speed, high
energy, impact of a complex structure like an aircraft, into a
discontinuous wall with windows etc. is difficult. What is known is
that nearly all of the energy from this event would be dissipated in
the initial impact, and subsequent buckling of the aircraft.

We are lead to believe that not only did the 757 penetrate the outer
wall, but continued on to penetrate separate internal walls totaling
9 feet of reinforced concrete. The final breach of concrete was a
nearly perfectly cut circular hole (see below) in a reinforced
concrete wall, with no subsequent damage to the rest of the wall.
(If we are to believe that somehow this aluminum aircraft did in
fact reach this sixth final wall.)

EXIT HOLE IN PENTAGON RING-C
American Airlines Flight 77, a Boeing 757, is alleged to have
punched through 6 blast-resistant concrete walls‹a total of nine
feet of reinforced concrete‹before exiting through this hole.

It is physically impossible for the wall to have failed in a neat
clean cut circle, period. When I first saw this hole, a chill went
down my spine because I knew it was not possible to have a
reinforced concrete wall fail in this manner, it should have caved
in, in some fashion.

How do you create a nice clean hole in a reinforced concrete wall?
with an explosive shaped charge. An explosive shaped charge, or
cutting charge is used in various military warhead devices. You
design the geometry of the explosive charge so that you create a
focused line of energy. You essentially focus nearly all of the
explosive energy in what is referred to as a jet. You use this jet
to cut and penetrate armor on a tank, or the walls of a bunker. The
signature is clear and unmistakable. In a missile, the explosive
charge is circular to allow the payload behind the initial shaped
charge to enter whatever has been penetrated.

I do not know what happened on 9/11, I do not know how politics
works in this country, I can not explain why the mainstream media
does not report on the problems with the 9/11 Commission. But I am
an engineer, and I know what happens in high speed impacts, and how
shaped charges are used to "cut" through materials.

I have not addressed several other major gaps in the Pentagon/757
incident. The fact that this aircraft somehow ripped several light
towers clean out of the ground without any damage to the aircraft
(which I also feel is impossible), the fact that the two main
engines were never recovered from the wreckage, and the fact that
our government has direct video coverage of the flight path, and
impact, from at least a gas station and hotel, which they have
refused to release.

You can call me a "tin hat", crazy, conspiracy theory, etc, but I
can say from my expertise that the damage at the Pentagon was not
caused by a Boeing 757.

Sincerely,
Michael Meyer

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 13
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 23:11:29 -0800
From: John Leonard <jpleonard@verizon.net>
Subject: Under the Hammer at CNN - Sheen, Tarpley, Alex Jones

An update to my press release that promised CNN would interview
Webster Tarpley, please see lower half of text.

URL: http://www.free-press-release.com/news/200603/1143065487.html

Dam Break for "9/11 Truth?" - Webster Tarpley and Charlie Sheen hit
the Mainstream

CNN and New York Magazine interview Webster Tarpley, author of "9/11
Synthetic Terror:
Made in USA." Actor Charlie Sheen says the wildest conspiracy theory
is the official line.

(See update 3/24 below)

March 22. It will be a first for America's mainstream media tonight.
CNN Headline News will air an interview with "9/11 Truth" author
Webster Griffin Tarpley on Showbiz Tonight (7-8 p.m., replay at 11).

Tarpley will comment on Sheen's remarks and size up the various
schools of "9/11 conspiracy" thought on CNN. The new edition of
Tarpley's "Synthetic Terror" points out the different viewpoints on
9/11, which range from the Bush administration version, to the
"bungling negligence" theory partly espoused by the 9/11 commission,
to the "Let It Happen on Purpose" or LIHOP theory, a compromise
popular among liberal intellectuals like Michael Moore.

CNN's move comes in the wake of a far-reaching article in New York
Magazine on the 9/11 controversy this week at
http://www.nymag.com/news/features/16464/index.html , which cited
Tarpley, plus hard-hitting comments by actor Charlie Sheen on the
Alex Jones talk radio show, infowars.com, on Monday, see
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2006/200306charliesheen.htm

Tarpley's book, "9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA" presents the
radical view of no hijackers, controlled demolition of the WTC, and
an inside job by a "rogue network esconced in key nodes of the
establishment." His Tarpley's publisher, John Leonard of
www.ProgressivePress.com, is adamant that "LIHOP" is useless because
it leaves intact the story of Arab attackers, and thereby the pretext
for war on the Middle East. He and Tarpley subscribe to the "MIHOP"
or "Made it Happen on Purpose - from A to Z" explanation.

The precedent is Operation Northwoods, a 1962 plan by the Joint
Chiefs of Staff to fabricate an atrocity and blame it on Cuba. The
plot was nixed by Kennedy. Northwoods documents were released under
the FOIA act before Bush took power.

According to Alex Jones' website, "Actor Charlie Sheen has joined a
growing army of other highly credible public figures in questioning
the official story of 9/11 and calling for a new independent
investigation of the attack and the circumstances surrounding it.

"Over the past two years, scores of highly regarded individuals have
gone public to express their serious doubts about 9/11. These include
former presidential advisor and CIA analyst Ray McGovern, the father
of Reaganomics and former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury Paul
Craig Roberts, BYU physics Professor Steven Jones, former German
defense minister Andreas von Buelow, former MI5 officer David
Shayler, former Blair cabinet member Michael Meacher, former Chief
Economist for the Department of Labor during President George W.
Bush's first term Morgan Reynolds and many more....

"The star of current hit comedy show Two and a Half Men and dozens of
movies including Platoon and Young Guns, Sheen.... agreed that the
biggest conspiracy theory was put out by the government itself... It
seems to me like 19 amateurs with box cutters taking over four
commercial airliners and hitting 75% of their targets, that feels
like a conspiracy theory. It raises a lot of questions."

Tarpley's message to people of good will: "If you want to stop the
war in iraq, and prevent the attack on Iran, the only way to do it is
to put 9/11 truth on the front page everywhere. Make the official
version explode, or the bombs will."

P.S. www.911blogger.com wrote:
Tarpley got a very short clip, but the piece was a major hit for 9/11
skeptics, great stuff... we will have a version up shortly so you can
check it out.

The CNN website is http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/showbiz.tonight/ .
We hope a transcript of the show will be posted tomorrow.
Video clips have been posted at:
http://www.911blogger.com/files/video/911truthCNN.mov
http://www.stoplying.ca/media/showbiz1.wmv
http://www.911podcasts.com/files/video/ShowbizTonight20060322.wmv
http://www.911podcasts.com/files/video/ShowbizTonight20060322.rm

Update, March 24.
The other day, Wednesday, March 22nd (my son's birthday) I got a call
around midday from a woman at CNN in New York who asked if I had an
author they could put on the air that very evening. They wanted an
"objective and balanced" survey of the various schools of 9/11
conspiracy thought for a story on Charlie Sheen. Of course, my heavy
hitter on 9/11 is Webster Tarpley, and he even wrote a preface about
Lihop and Mihop in the 2nd edition of 911 Synthetic Terror. She'd
heard of him through the New York magazine article. I put them in
touch, and reminded him they were looking for something neutral. He
reminded me that no matter what you say, they will cut and edit it
into the shape they want.

On the show, it was Sheen and Hammer leaning to the radical side,
with the blonde spinning the government yarn, so maybe they wanted
somebody more wishy-washy in the middle?

Webster says they taped him for 15 minutes and only played 30 seconds
(and even that was Lihop, mentioning the Zogby poll in NYC where half
the people believed top officials had foreknowledge). A fellow 9/11
publisher wrote us to say "I think they may have cut your interview
because it was 'too good.'" I don't know what was in his outtakes -
let's hope they may be used by CNN in future. In fact, we can write
to CNN and suggest that.

My take was that they were only ready for "cover up" and "unanswered
questions" so far - the media want to chew on this a while before
getting around to answers. The big difference between Tarpley and
much of the 9/11 intelligentsia is that he deals in answers, not just
questions, and in political scope rather than minutiae - 9/11 is just
part of his devastating challenge to the ruling oligarchy.

Yet last night, CNN gave full play to the pugilistic Alex Jones' hard
punches on 9/11 truth, as the man who broadcast the original,
explosive Sheen interview (see CNN transcripts,
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/sbt.html ).

Alex has been hitting the media very hard on their censorship of the
Sheen story, and they felt it. Under pressure, the corporate media
must look out for #1 - especially newscaster CNN, as the alternative
Internet lures more and more of the flock away.

After the New York magazine article hit the web on Monday 3/20,
Tarpley called it a warning shot by another faction of the elite
across the bow of the Cheneyac neo-cons (see
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarOnFreedom/message/2863).
Interestingly, the same issue carries an article reviling Larry Silverstein.

And after Alex Jones, the second story on Thursday's Showbiz Tonight
was about the accidenting of Princess Diana. A coincidence? Or does
the undertone - here anti-Silverstein, there pro-Muslim boyfriend -
signal the lines have been drawn for a counteroffensive against the neocons?

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 14
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 23:14:31 -0800
From: "Scott Peden" <scotpeden@cruzio.com>
Subject: RE: Re: Do you agree with Charlie Sheen? Vote Now

Obviously only being advertised on pro insider groups, let the neo cons hear
about this and they will either flood it, or more likely just have the poll
pulled.

Presently it is 80/20 5342/1340 yes/no

Humm, that is a lot of votes though, more than the membership all the 911
sites I know of tripled.

Maybe there are loads and loads that know it was a set up and we are just
quiet, the noisy ones are here…..

-----Original Message-----
From: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of mojo_j_2000
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 8:07 PM
To: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [911TruthAction] Re: Do you agree with Charlie Sheen? Vote Now

76 -y
24 - n
so far

--- In 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com, Chris Bell <somebigguy88@...>
wrote:
>
> http://edition.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/showbiz.tonight/
>
> The Truthers are pulling away!!!!
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low
rates.
>

SPONSORED LINKS
United state flag
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=United+state+flag&w1=United+state+flag&
w2=United+state+grant&w3=United+state+coin&w4=United+state+military&w5=Unite
d+state+patent&w6=United+state+army&c=6&s=145&.sig=nRgNB3zA5JVSxsvAngzk8g>
United state grant
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=United+state+grant&w1=United+state+flag
&w2=United+state+grant&w3=United+state+coin&w4=United+state+military&w5=Unit
ed+state+patent&w6=United+state+army&c=6&s=145&.sig=nzQBC9n-CI9mqUWAHaiWqg>
United state coin
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=United+state+coin&w1=United+state+flag&
w2=United+state+grant&w3=United+state+coin&w4=United+state+military&w5=Unite
d+state+patent&w6=United+state+army&c=6&s=145&.sig=9u_OPhJRfvfENeIge-WD5w>
United state military
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=United+state+military&w1=United+state+f
lag&w2=United+state+grant&w3=United+state+coin&w4=United+state+military&w5=U
nited+state+patent&w6=United+state+army&c=6&s=145&.sig=C29ZtaVceIR3TwuIO1sl0
g>
United state patent
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=United+state+patent&w1=United+state+fla
g&w2=United+state+grant&w3=United+state+coin&w4=United+state+military&w5=Uni
ted+state+patent&w6=United+state+army&c=6&s=145&.sig=cNIdZGj5zCHVi1O7sSFNUw>
United state army
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=United+state+army&w1=United+state+flag&
w2=United+state+grant&w3=United+state+coin&w4=United+state+military&w5=Unite
d+state+patent&w6=United+state+army&c=6&s=145&.sig=6rqZ9ja9mR8s-wlEQ_5-QA>

_____

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

* Visit your group " 911TruthAction
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/911TruthAction> " on the web.

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
911TruthAction-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:911TruthAction-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

_____

[This message contained attachments]

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 15
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 09:19:12 -0000
From: "mojo_j_2000" <mojo_j_2000@yahoo.com>
Subject: coast to coast: alex jones...the worm has turned

"charlie sheen hit barbwire for others in hollywood"

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 16
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 09:23:44 -0000
From: "mojo_j_2000" <mojo_j_2000@yahoo.com>
Subject: Israeli Software Firm Drops U.S. Deal

Israeli Software Firm Drops U.S. Deal

Israeli Software Firm Drops U.S. Deal
Mar 23 10:52 PM US/Eastern
Email this story

By TED BRIDIS
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON

A leading Israeli software company abandoned its plans Thursday to
buy a smaller U.S. rival in a $225 million deal because of national
security objections by the Bush administration.

Check Point Software Technologies Ltd. in Ramat Gan, Israel,
formally withdrew its proposal near the conclusion of a rare, full-
blown investigation by a U.S. review panel over the company's plans
to buy a smaller rival, Sourcefire Inc.

Check Point had been told U.S. officials feared the transaction
could endanger some of government's most sensitive computer systems.

Lawyers for Check Point offered to attach conditions to the sale
that executives believed were onerous but were intended to satisfy
the concerns expressed by the review panel, the Committee on Foreign
Investments in the United States, said one person familiar with the
process. But no agreement could be reached.

The Treasury Department, which oversees the committee, formally
accepted Check Point's request to withdraw from the review process.
This ensures the panel will not be required to submit
recommendations to President Bush whether to block the deal.

The committee has concluded only 25 full-blown investigations in
more than 1,600 business transactions it has reviewed since 1988. In
roughly half the investigations, companies pulled out of the deal
rather than face imminent rejection.

George H.W. Bush is the only president ever to block a deal,
stopping the sale of a Seattle aircraft parts manufacturer to China
in February 1990.

The objections by the FBI and Pentagon were partly over specialized
intrusion detection software known as "Snort," which guards some
classified U.S. military and intelligence computers. Snort's author
is a senior executive at Sourcefire, based in Columbia, Md.

The investigation was carried out by the same U.S. review panel that
approved the now-abandoned ports deal involving Dubai-owned DP
World.

Sourcefire said in a statement it was prepared to continue operating
independently as a booming software security company. One financial
analyst said Sourcefire may limit future transactions with U.S.-
based companies to avoid another security review.

"Given the CFIUS concerns, they may have to limit their potential
partners," said Peter Cooper of Morgan Stanley. "A U.S. acquirer
would be a lot simpler and cleaner."

Cooper said it would have been politically sensitive for the Bush
administration to approve the Israeli software purchase so soon
after the collapse of the ports deal involving the United Arab
Emirates.

"That may have influenced this," Cooper said. "It might have been
complicated from a political point of view."

In private meetings between the panel and Check Point, officials
from the FBI and Defense Department objected forcefully to
permitting any foreign company to acquire some sensitive Sourcefire
technology for preventing hacker break-ins and monitoring data
traffic, an executive familiar with the discussions previously told
The Associated Press. This executive spoke on condition of anonymity
because government negotiations are supposed to remain confidential.

Under the sale, publicly announced Oct. 6, Check Point would own all
Sourcefire's patents, source-code blueprints for its software and
the expertise of employees.

The review panel privately notified Check Point on Feb. 6 it
intended to fully investigate the transaction's security risks, the
executive said. That was days before the furor erupted over the
Dubai ports deal.

Check Point disclosed the news to investors Feb. 13, but the
announcement drew little attention despite escalating scrutiny and
interest in Washington over such reviews.

Sourcefire's protection and monitoring technology builds on the
popularity of Snort, which was created by its chief technology
officer and is distributed free.

Unlike Sourcefire's commercial products, Snort's blueprints are open
for inspection to assure it works as advertised. This makes it
popular inside the U.S. intelligence community, even alongside more
mainstream security products from Cisco Systems Inc. or Juniper
Networks Inc.

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 17
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 09:32:16 +0000 (GMT)
From: James Patton <james_patton@yahoo.com>
Subject: Can anyone help me to answer William Blum's questions re. 9/11?

Hi All,

I admire the work of William Blum, however he is skeptical about
the various theories re. the events of September 11.

Here are Blum's questions:

1. The complications [of staging 9/11] would have made it
next to impossible to stage with such "success", and without
making it obvious to virtually everyone.

I also think that some of the questions raised by 9-11 researchers
are not very impressive. (For example:)

2. Why would the government want to destroy building 7?

3. And the fact that Bush quietly spent time in a class with young students
after hearing about the first plane -- If it was being staged he would
have reacted in a different way.

4. Or that several of the hijackers turned up "alive" in the Middle East.
Why couldn't their identity have been stolen?

5. And more things like that.

I note that Blum ignores a lot of stuff (you can read his whole post below).
Can anyone help me to answer his questions so I can write an e-mail to him?

Thankyou!

Kind regards,

James Patton

= = =

From William Blum's Anti-Empire Report, March 22 2006:

September 11, 2001

Many readers have asked me why I haven't expressed any opinion about the events of that infamous day. The reason is that I preferred to not get entangled in all the complexity and controversy, the arguments and hard feelings, without any clear answers. But, very briefly, here goes.

Almost all of those who have asked me this believe that it was all planned and carried out by US government officials. I don't think so. Not that I would put it past the imperial mafia morally. I just think the complications would have made it next to impossible to stage with such "success", and without making it obvious to virtually everyone. I think what's more likely is that the government knew that some terrorist act involving aircraft was being planned and they let it happen so as to make use of it politically, or they watched the progress of the planning to see where it would lead, and perhaps capture other plotters, and they waited too long, which is apparently what happened in the first terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in 1993. There is an impressive body of evidence indicating that various government officials had knowledge of the broad outline of the 2001 planned deed, if not every detail.

I also think that some of the questions raised by 9-11 researchers are not very impressive. Like no one has given me a good explanation as to why the government would want to destroy building 7. And the fact that Bush quietly spent time in a class with young students after hearing about the first plane -- If it was being staged he would have reacted in a different way. Or that several of the hijackers turned up "alive" in the Middle East. Why couldn't their identity have been stolen? And more things like that.

There are numerous questions about the official version -- which leaves the government completely innocent, albeit incompetent -- that make it very difficult to take the story at face value, but one doesn't therefore have to jump to the other extreme of a government operation.

http://members.aol.com/bblum6/aer31.htm

William Blum is the author of:

Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War 2
Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower
West-Bloc Dissident: A Cold War Memoir
Freeing the World to Death: Essays on the American Empire
<http://www.killinghope.org/ >

Previous Anti-Empire Reports can be read at this website:
http://members.aol.com/bblum6/American_holocaust.htm

---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail

[This message contained attachments]

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 18
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 04:54:15 -0800 (PST)
From: greg nixon <nxngrg@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Can anyone help me to answer William Blum's questions re. 9/11?

1. The complications [of staging 9/11] would have made it
next to impossible to stage with such "success", and without
making it obvious to virtually everyone.

- Not true, They run fake terror attacks thru the guise of a terror drill, Read Tarpley + see:
-http://team8plus.org/forum_viewtopic.php?6.16

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&before_9/11=militaryExercises

http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2002/09/149985.php

I also think that some of the questions raised by 9-11 researchers
are not very impressive. (For example:)

- I think the Bush regime conspiracy theory of an Arab bogeyman in cave on the other side of the world coming to get us not impressive.

2. Why would the government want to destroy building 7?

- Insurance for Silverstein, Billiions in gold, evidence from OEM command center, DOD, Secret Service, SEC w/Enron, Worldcom files etc..

3. And the fact that Bush quietly spent time in a class with young studentsafter hearing about the first plane -- If it was being staged he would
have reacted in a different way.
- Speculative musing, who says Bush was involved? What was said in his a ear? "there is a coup from our private military unfolding right now..." Was that said?

4. Or that several of the hijackers turned up "alive" in the Middle East.
Why couldn't their identity have been stolen?

- they were, some plane turned up alive too in the FAA date base, no hijackings,no commercial planes destroyed.

5. And more things like that

- And more like this:

Think You Know What Happened on 9/11?
Do you still believe 9/11 was a terrorist attack where 19 Arab fundamentalists on orders from laptops in caves on the other side of the world outsmarted our trillion dollar defense and intelligence network? Doesn’t that sound like an outrageous conspiracy theory? Have you heard the alternate conspiracy theory: the one where radical elements in the U.S. Government wanted a transformation of foreign policy and increased military spending, and in order to do so, they would need a "New Pearl Harbor" to galvanize the masses to a war agenda(1). To ensure such an event, these individuals actually plotted and carried out such an attack, 9/11, and killed 2,986 Americans. The question is which story better explains the facts surrounding the day of the attacks?

It is now clear the official explanation of the attacks on September 11th 2001, the 9/11 Commission Report, is a carefully constructed lie to cover up the truth of what occurred on that horrible day. This is seen through the painstaking analytical refutation of the official story by Professor David Ray Griffin in his book: The 9/11 Commission Report, Omissions and Distortions (2). To use the words of Kevin Ryan, whistleblower from Underwriter Laboratories, the company which certified the steel in the WTC, "Anyone who honestly looks at the evidence has difficulty finding anything in the official story of 9/11 that is believable. It’s not one or two strange twists or holes in the story, the whole thing is bogus from start to end (3)."
If 9/11 was not a surprise terrorist attack, then who did it and why? The evidence is strongly pointing to rogue elements in the Bush/Cheney administration, primarily individuals associated with the NeoCon think tank, the P.N.A.C (Project For A New American Century: the authors wanting another Pearl Harbor), private military contractors and corporations. Author Webster Tarpley, in 9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in the U.S.A (4) goes into great detail about the intricacies of these operations best described as "False Flag Terrorism." In other words, make it look like the people you want to attack or invade (Arabs) attacked us first.
Quite simply, the alleged Al Qaeda "terrorists" did not have the operational capability for such a spectacular attack, and further these "terrorists" were actually coddled intelligence assets with no real ties to the actual operation of 9/11, this horrifying domestic attack was carried out by "black operatives" in the U.S. military (5).The U.S. Military? That’s right! Ever heard of Operation Northwood’s (6)? Did you know that 9/11 was actually drilled a dozen times? That on the day of 9/11 itself, there were a combination of war games (7) and Terror drills (8), only this time it went "live". Did you know that explosives brought down the Twin Trade towers (9)? Or how about the fact that two of the flights 11 and 77 did not exist on that day in the Government’s data base the BTS (10) - that there is evidence that flights 175 and 93 were not destroyed on that day (11)?
I cannot think of a more dire crisis in our Republic and for the future of humanity as a whole than a false flag terror attack on Americans plotted and carried out by elements in our own government for political expedience and corporate enrichment - not to mention the groundwork laid for the next world war. These killers and enablers in our government and military apparatus must be brought to justice at once. 9/11 was immensely successful in rallying the masses to a war agenda which has redistributed billions of dollars towards projects not in the interests of a humane Democracy - Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib, two wars of aggression, the Patriot Act and a clearly fraudulent election - These crimes deserve a 21st century "Nuremberg Trial" There are no other political concerns. 9/11 truth must be made known. If we don’t win this battle it is all over, for all of us.
Now is the time for activism. Now is the time for the people to get together and say this frame-up on humanity ends now. If you think this is too overwhelming, too large to take on, remember the Civil Rights Movement. A few ordinary folks simply decided they had had enough. Talk to your neighbors, form discussion groups, start planning a way to get every honest and decent American together to stop this madness. We are many and the criminals few. This is no longer about the Left or the Right; this is about good vs. evil. You the reader have the power to stop this. Start the dialogue now.
Greg Nixon

1.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century 2.http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article8765.htm
3. http://www.globaloutlook.ca/10FW.htm
4. http://www.tarpley.net/welcome.html
5. http://team8plus.org/
6. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/northwoods.html
7. http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=387
8. http://team8plus.org/forum_viewtopic.php?6.16
9. http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/wtc7.html
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc7.html
http://911review.com/articles/griffin/nyc1.html
10. http://www.serendipity.li/wot/holmgren_interview.htm
http://www.bts.gov/
11. http://www.rense.com/general68/911h.htm
http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/defimg.asp
http://911closeup.com/index.shtml?ID=51

150 "smoking Guns" for 9/11 Government Complicity http://killtown.911review.org/911smokingguns.html
For extensive analysis of private military contractors preparing for 9/11:

http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=55

http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=324

http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=325

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/05/289643.shtml

http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=1073

http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=1074

http://team8plus.org/forum_viewtopic.php?6.16

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?
timeline=complete_911_timeline&before_9/11=militaryExercises

http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2002/09/149985.php

James Patton <james_patton@yahoo.com> wrote: Hi All,

I admire the work of William Blum, however he is skeptical about
the various theories re. the events of September 11.

Here are Blum's questions:

1. The complications [of staging 9/11] would have made it
next to impossible to stage with such "success", and without
making it obvious to virtually everyone.

I also think that some of the questions raised by 9-11 researchers
are not very impressive. (For example:)

2. Why would the government want to destroy building 7?

3. And the fact that Bush quietly spent time in a class with young students
after hearing about the first plane -- If it was being staged he would
have reacted in a different way.

4. Or that several of the hijackers turned up "alive" in the Middle East.
Why couldn't their identity have been stolen?

5. And more things like that.

I note that Blum ignores a lot of stuff (you can read his whole post below).
Can anyone help me to answer his questions so I can write an e-mail to him?

Thankyou!

Kind regards,

James Patton

= = =

From William Blum's Anti-Empire Report, March 22 2006:

September 11, 2001

Many readers have asked me why I haven't expressed any opinion about the events of that infamous day. The reason is that I preferred to not get entangled in all the complexity and controversy, the arguments and hard feelings, without any clear answers. But, very briefly, here goes.

Almost all of those who have asked me this believe that it was all planned and carried out by US government officials. I don't think so. Not that I would put it past the imperial mafia morally. I just think the complications would have made it next to impossible to stage with such "success", and without making it obvious to virtually everyone. I think what's more likely is that the government knew that some terrorist act involving aircraft was being planned and they let it happen so as to make use of it politically, or they watched the progress of the planning to see where it would lead, and perhaps capture other plotters, and they waited too long, which is apparently what happened in the first terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in 1993. There is an impressive body of evidence indicating that various government officials had knowledge of the broad outline of the 2001 planned deed, if not every detail.

I also think that some of the questions raised by 9-11 researchers are not very impressive. Like no one has given me a good explanation as to why the government would want to destroy building 7. And the fact that Bush quietly spent time in a class with young students after hearing about the first plane -- If it was being staged he would have reacted in a different way. Or that several of the hijackers turned up "alive" in the Middle East. Why couldn't their identity have been stolen? And more things like that.

There are numerous questions about the official version -- which leaves the government completely innocent, albeit incompetent -- that make it very difficult to take the story at face value, but one doesn't therefore have to jump to the other extreme of a government operation.

http://members.aol.com/bblum6/aer31.htm

William Blum is the author of:

Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War 2
Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower
West-Bloc Dissident: A Cold War Memoir
Freeing the World to Death: Essays on the American Empire
<http://www.killinghope.org/ >

Previous Anti-Empire Reports can be read at this website:
http://members.aol.com/bblum6/American_holocaust.htm

---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail

SPONSORED LINKS
United state patent United state government grant United state coin United state flag United state military United state citizenship

---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

Visit your group "911TruthAction" on the web.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
911TruthAction-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

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

---------------------------------
New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big.

---------------------------------
Blab-away for as little as 1¢/min. Make PC-to-Phone Calls using Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.

[This message contained attachments]

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 19
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 06:28:57 -0800 (PST)
From: Cathy Garger <savorsuccesslady@yahoo.com>
Subject: winnipeg - part of larger war, uh," exercise" ? Gulp.

Remember this thing I wrote waaaay back in November, about a huge war game, from Canada, into the US, and down to Mexico, too?

http://www.parapolitics.info/phorum/read.php?f=31&i=652&t=652

Well as you can guess, they don't simulate these things for no good reason...

Here is something else, with a different name, now public in Canada... Is this the same war exercise, or part of a larger one, perhaps???

From April 30th to May 6th, 2006, more than 500 Canadian troops, backed by helicopters, armoured vehicles, and artillery, intend to transform downtown Winnipeg, Canada into an urban-warfare training playground in the largest training excercise of its kind ever held in Canada. Operation Charging Bison is intended to simulate situations Canadian soldiers "would encounter in places such as Afghanistan and Iraq."
http://winnipeg.indymedia.org/

Cathy Garger





---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.

The world can only be redeemed through action--movement -- motion. Uncoerced, unbribed and unbought, humanity will move toward the light.
Alice Hubbard's introduction to An American Bible (1912)

---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.

[This message contained attachments]

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/911TruthAction/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
911TruthAction-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

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