The Next Level

[Jerry Fletcher]

[Booger!]

Jerry - thanks.
OK - where can I see the footage unedited? If you do not know, then I ask where did you see the footage unedited. Convince me - because Im not stupid.

And even without the footage - skyscrapers which fall into themselves magically, and a third named building 7 which falls for no reason, in the same fashion?

Silverstein is still a very good place to start.

Sorry but my relationship with the universe is as my childrens father and the world they live in. I dont like being conned & enslaved, and I dislike it even more for them. My impetus is strongly tilted toward BS elimination and concrete steps based in the here and now.

[capt_w]

Robert M. Bowman,
James H. Fetzer,
Wayne Madsen,
John McMurtry,
Morgan Reynolds,
Andreas von Buelow,

"joined with others in common cause"

who are the others...then
VIPs only ...stay behind the rope please
-----------------------------------------------------

Experts Claim Official 9/11 Story is a Hoax
http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2006/1/emw339303.htm

Scholars for 9/11 Truth call for verification and publication by an international consortium.

Duluth, MN (PRWEB) January 30, 2006 -- A group of distinguished experts and scholars, including Robert M. Bowman, James H. Fetzer, Wayne Madsen, John McMurtry, Morgan Reynolds, and Andreas von Buelow, have concluded that senior government officials have covered up crucial facts about what really happened on 9/11.

They have joined with others in common cause as members of "Scholars for 9/11 Truth" (S9/11T), because they are convinced, based on their own research, that the administration has been deceiving the nation about critical events in New York and Washington, D.C.

These experts suggest these events may have been orchestrated by elements within the administration to manipulate Americans into supporting policies at home and abroad they would never have condoned absent "another Pearl Harbor."

They believe that this White House is incapable of investigating itself and hope the possibility that Congress might hold an unaccountable administration accountable is not merely naive or wishful thinking.

They are encouraging news services around the world to secure scientific advice by taking advantage of university resources to verify or to falsify their discoveries. Extraordinary situations, they believe, require extraordinary measures.

If this were done, they contend, one of the great hoaxes of history would stand naked before the eyes of the world and its perpetrators would be clearly exposed, which may be the only hope for saving this nation from ever greater abuse.

They hope this might include The New York Times, which, in their opinion, has repeatedly failed to exercise the leadership expecedt from our nation's newspaper of record by a series of inexplicable lapses. It has failed to vigorously investigate tainted elections, lies leading to the war in Iraq, or illegal NSA spying on the American people, major unconstitutional events. In their view, The Times might compensate for its loss of stature by helping to reveal the truth about one of the great turning-point events of modern history.

Stunning as it may be to acknowledge, they observe, the government has brought but one indictment against anyone and, to the best of their knowledge, has not even reprimanded anyone for incompetence or dereliction of duty. The official conspiracy theory--that nineteen Arab hijackers under control of one man in the wilds of Afghanistan brought this about--is unsupportable by the evidential data, which they have studied. They even believe there are good reasons for suspecting that video tapes officially attributed to Osama bin Laden are not genuine.

They have found the government's own investigiation to be severely flawed. The 9/11 Commission, designated to investigate the attack, was directed by Philip Zelikow, part of the Bush transition team in the NSA sector and the co-author of a book with Condoleezza Rice. A Bush supporter and director of national security affairs, he could hardly be expected to conduct an objective and impartial investigation.

They have discovered that The 9/11 Commission Report is replete with omissions, distortions, and factual errors, which David Ray Griffin has documented in his book, The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions. The official report, for example, entirely ignores the collapse of WTC7, a 47-story building, which was hit by no airplanes, was only damaged by a few small fires, and fell seven hours after the attack.

Here are some of the kinds of considerations that these experts and scholar find profoundly troubling:

* In the history of structural engineering, steel-frame high-rise buildings have never been brought down due to fires either before or since 9/11, so how can fires have brought down three in one day? How is this possible?

* The BBC has reported that at least five of the nineteen alleged "hijackers" have turned up alive and well living in Saudi Arabia, yet according to the FBI, they were among those killed in the attacks. How is this possible?

* Frank DeMartini, a project manager for the WTC, said the buildings were designed with load redistribution capabilities to withstand the impact of airliners, whose effects would be like "puncturing mosquito netting with a pencil." Yet they completely collapsed. How is this possible?

* Since the melting point of steel is about 2,700*F, the temperature of jet fuel fires does not exceed 1,800*F under optimal conditions, and UL certified the steel used to 2,000*F for six hours, the buildings cannot have collapsed due to heat from the fires. How is this possible?

* Flight 77, which allegedly hit the building, left the radar screen in the vicinity of the Ohio/Kentucky border, only to "reappear" in very close proximity to the Pentagon shortly before impact. How is this possible?

* Foreign "terrorists" who were clever enough to coordinate hijacking four commercial airliners seemingly did not know that the least damage to the Pentagon would be done by hitting its west wing. How is this possible?

* Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta, in an underground bunker at the White House, watched Vice President Cheney castigate a young officer for asking, as the plane drew closer and closer to the Pentagon, "Do the orders still stand?" The order cannot have been to shoot it down, but must have been the opposite. How is this possible?

* A former Inspector General for the Air Force has observed that Flight 93, which allegedly crashed in Pennsylvania, should have left debris scattered over an area less than the size of a city block; but it is scattered over an area of about eight square miles. How is this possible?

* A tape recording of interviews with air traffic controllers on duty on 9/11 was deliberately crushed, cut into very small pieces, and distributed in assorted places to insure its total destruction. How is this possible?

* The Pentagon conducted a training exercise called "MASCAL" simulating the crash of a Boeing 757 into the building on 24 October 2000, and yet Condoleezza Rice, among others, has repeatedly asserted that "no one ever imagined" a domestic airplane could be used as a weapon. How is this possible?

Their own physics research has established that only controlled demolitions are consistent with the near-gravity speed of fall and virtually symmetrical collapse of all three of the WTC buildings. While turning concrete into very fine dust, they fell straight-down into their own footprints.

These experts and scholars have found themselves obliged to conclude that the 9/11 atrocity represents an instance of the approach--which has been identified by Karl Rove, the President's closest adviser--of "creating our own reality."

# # #


-----------------------------------------------------------
my thoughts
-----------------------------------------------------------
while it has to be remembered that the info on 911
contained is mostly
interesting/ thought provoking/worth considering

it's the way that these politically
motivated groups use it -
within the realm of left / right paradigm of fake US politics

so...are they setting the stage for the democrats to
win in 2008 - with many sighing in relief at the
very humiliating demise [photo ops/trials/impeachment]
of Bush/Cheney
only to see Hilary Clinton [or whoever]
further instigate a neoliberal [blair like] fascist state?

remember we in the UK saw the demise
of Thatcher/Major only to see that
smirking twat Blair step in
to the tune of
'things can only get better'

[Phil Howe]

[Fintan]

In passing, the list of "questions" posed by that group of "experts"
above... is pretty lame.
Experts Claim Official 9/11 Story is a Hoax
http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2006/1/emw339303.htm

Also note that Jim Fetzer
who coordinated these experts, is referenced by David Ray Griffin:

The Destruction of the World Trade Center:
Why the Official Account Cannot Be True by Dr. David Ray Griffin
January 29, 2006 911truth.com
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=GRI20060129&articleId=1846

"On the other hand, if explosives were used in the buildings, there would be a high probability that all 11 features would have occurred in all three buildings. For this argument, I am indebted to James Fetzer, who---through his essay "'Conspiracy Theories': The Case of 9/11"---inspired it, and to Paul Zarembka, who helped with the final formulation."

Now, that other guy mentioned by Griffin is Paul Zarembka:

Homepage: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PZarembka
Bio: Editor, Research in Political Economy, Elsevier Science, 1977-present, and Professor of Economics, State University of New York at Buffalo

He has a book coming out in early Spring 2006:

THE HIDDEN HISTORY OF 9-11-2001
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PZarembka/volume23.htm

It's a compendium of articles including one's by Griffin and Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed.

But Part 4 of that book, promises to be an exciting read:

As Zarembka comments:

"The final chapter, while not explicit, offers a possible connection to the process of undermining pensions in the U.K."

PART IV. DRAWING A CONNECTION: UNDERMINING PENSIONS

The UK Pension System: The Betrayal by New Labour in its Neoliberal
Global Context by Jamie Morgan, Lancaster University, Lancaster

I can hardly wait.

Here's a sample of Jamie Morgan's previous work:

"As has often been argued, the timeless, ahistorical, institution-free
fundamentals of orthodox method cannot be easily reconciled to problems
of markets as rule systems. But what does it mean that trust and the
rules that constitute market systems are not a central problem for
orthodox economics?"
http://www.geocities.com/postneoliberal_review/Morgan1.htm


Riveting eh?

So 9/11 was all about undermining pensions in the U.K.

Whou'da thunk!?

[Blue]

Skepticism is a good thing! So Fintan's skepticism takes extreme proportions, that is precisely why we need it. Phil Howe was vicious. Too black and white. Phil delivered the us vs. them tactic of which he was concurrently accusing Fintan. Fintan, I recognize you are about as paranoid as they come, but that is why I devour your site so! It makes me question, healthfully and helpfully, other news sources. I also listen to Rense, Jones, Goodman . . . perhaps ALL operatives . . . or perhaps Phil is right and you, Fintan, are the operative. But how would Phil and I ever know which was which in a game of he said, she said? I figure, the best we consumers of information can do is taste equally and generously. I even do WSJ, NYT, NPR and PBS! If we get some of everything, we can think for ourselves. Fintan, don't you want us to think for ourselves? Seems you do. I would never take your news at face value, but I'd never call you a quack and shut you off either. Break for News is a fine body of work and Fintan whether you are a good or a bad guy, you are one smart motherfucker and I respect you unconditionally.

[Jerry Fletcher]

Ok, I'm not trying to be a smartass, and I've got no point to prove myself.

booger!, I admire your dedication to building a better world for your children, and Phil, I respect your thoroughness in looking at all the possibilities.

yeah, the demo of 7 was simply appalling, and that's as good a place as any to start - it doesn't matter where you start, as long as you really want to figure stuff out. Sometimes you gotta say bye bye to your 'research buddies' when it's time to move on - but that's the price we pay.

Here's the difference that I see between Fintan's research and the rest of the 'movement.'

He published a picture of the people that should be held responsible. The people who actually shook hands or nodded or whatever, but actually agreed that the event should transpire. Their decisions put the events in motion, and were actualized through the coordinated efforts of the various governmental, military, intelligence and media organizations at their command. They are the figureheads of the democratic free world, and the war on terror could not have begun without their prior approval. They don't represent the people, and they lie. Yeah, it blows.

Why do you think we can't 'fight' these guys? Coincidence? Hardly. Try getting the goods on a mob boss someday. They are beyond our control and beyond our reproach. That's why they make the decisions that they do. They like it this way. I think that's why they used to be called kings.

So, operative shmoperative. Who else has said 'whodunnit'? Who else has posted a picture? Who else has pinpointed a collusive power structure that actually could have orchestrated this astoundingly expensive and complicated operation? That's why I enjoy Fintan's research - he actually finishes a question with an answer.

I don't care who these other clowns work for. IMO, their research is lame, their journalism is tabloid, and their tone is fearful and confused. Ultimately, I don't care what they're 'up to' because their information is useless to me.

'The leaders of the G8 countries' is not an 'answer' anybody wants to hear. But you know what - it beat's trying to 'pin down' the 'illuminati'.

[Blue]

In response to Jerry Fletcher, TONS of people have played whodunnit. Fintan's work on 911 is special, I agree, but not because he dared guess and name the actual villains behind the crime. Everyone's done that! If that's all your giving Fintan, it's not much . . .
I think Fintan's best contribution to the 911 movement is that he makes us question other alternative media icons' and pundits' spin on whodunnit, their own neat conclusions to the murder mystery. I mean, everyone's got one! But Fintan reminds us that at least half of the whodunnit stories are probably bullshit planted by operatives in order to mislead the truth movement. We cannot even really know which half dear Fintan falls in himself! But like I said already, it's all about questioning! I'll say it again . . . the more guarded and skeptical (paranoid, even) we are the better we see the truth, or, the more select a truth we arrive upon "at the end of the day."

[hawkwind]

I think Blue’s observation about paranoia is interesting. I’ve read several studies that claim, lacking organic schizophrenia or delusion, paranoia is nothing more than a natural state of heightened awareness. There are a few caveats involved though, while this state is self defensively beneficial, it may be physiologically disastrous.

So, if over the programmed years of your life, you’ve lost that natural sense of paranoia, you might consider keeping a paranoid person around … kind of like the proverbial “canary in a coalmine”. My advice is that if the canary suddenly squawks “incoming!” … it may be a good idea to duck!

- Hawk
_________________
They're trying to stick a dead body inside of me - Abra Cadaver, The Hives

[capt w]

'paranoia' as a canary in the mine?

hmmm

what is this paranoia?

well it depends if a person is only reacting to
certain stimulus

IE a managed environment

like...say

the internet

or the 'normality culture'
that they have to confront...as a reality

that most people do not feel they have a choice dealing with
[why do they feel that way?]

if you think that breaking from the prescription of having to work
your ass off for a lame enforced/stage-crafted/managed democracy
and its endless aspiration culture built on greed and fucking
others over 'to get to the top' is ok....

is that paranioa?

then...well

its a stereotypifying labelling process isn't it?

i feel stage-craft is the key
the border between actor and audience has to be broken for
'people' to actually get off their arses and do something

the idea of galvanising a group to protest is dead

too many infiltrators/too many icons/too many people
wanna get a career boost/ a CV written
and it is just not effective

ulterior motives/vested interest IS politics


that is the root of a real paranoia

so i say
no heroes, no spokespeople, no groups,
no leaders...
constantly changing, developing
respect in opinions
interesting meanderings

sure it's a soap opera...
but if it was involving such notions as

integrity, accountability
and a good memory
for ones owns actions and words,

the ability for forgiveness of mistakes
[especially to ones self]

can everyone be heard...?

do we make enough time in our
lives to make that a reality?

if not why not?

[Blue]

Paranoia is just a word. Semantics is the key. The dominant paradigm bars us in. We are supposed to think it's safe in there and we'd be paranoid and suicidal to break out. Indeed in a world where soullessness is the norm, those with soul seem insane. I recognize paranoia is a "bad word," a definite stereotype. All I want to do is reclaim this word. Especially in regards to media and the general information glut. I count all parties guilty until proven . . . worthy. Paranoia means not trusting, but thinking. Thinking critically. Ruthlessly. Rapturously.

[Fintan]

[capt w]

"The dominant paradigm bars us in. We are supposed to think it's safe in there and we'd be paranoid and suicidal to break out."

well i'd argue that we are all presented with an enforced choice which is a deliberate polarity

one which has the purpose of trapping us in a defined malleable
enforced 'reality'


Neuro Linguistic Programming

not just written - but images & symbols & shapes
narratives - meanings

psychically driven into us from birth

in/out

= binary

= brain code

so what about everything being experienced at once

multiphrenia

the disorder that was labelled earlier

multi personality=
phrenia

'gifted'
'foresight'
'weird'

multi potential

multi dimension

= dangerous

but is labelled as paranoid

because it is a quantum of possibility

[quantum - as in unmeasurable]

anarchy

[Blue]

Captain: Well put. It is true indeed that "multiphrenia" is dangerous. It can be disabling! Many geniuses are dysfunctional. Insanity is not always pretty. To gain our souls I believe we must wager our minds. The strong resurface with the both intact and thriving.

Fintan: I know you are no Rense fan, but I first ran across Silverstein's sleazy, anachronistic redefinition of the age-old demolition-lingo "pull it" on Rense. There's a whole little pull-it niche there . . .
http://www.rense.com/Datapages/WTC7.htm

[Aniam]

QUESTIONS?

To Whom it may concern,

If you are not satisfied with the work that Fintan has put into researching the events of 9/11, why are you wasting your time on this forum? Don't you have something more important you could be doing with your meaningful life? I mean, suppose he is totally wrong, what does that prove?

Does anyone actually believe that if there is one solidly unified movement that is in full agreement with who was behind the destruction, and how it was accomplished, is really going to accomplish anything? Do you really think that the perpetrators would shamefully relinquish their power over the institutions and organizations they control, and turn themselves in to the Hague? If not, what are you going to do about it? Will you rise up in revolution and publicly behead them for their crimes? If so, then what makes the spirit of murder in your heart any different than the spirit of murder that is in theirs?