2010/07/31

San Diego Citizens Grand Jury Indicts Peter G. Peterson for Conspiracy in Mass Murder on 9/11/2001

PETER G. PETERSON is one of sixteen Individuals Cited By The San Diego Citizens Grand Jury As Deserving Criminal Investigation for The Charge of  'Conspiracy To Commit Mass Murder' on 9/11/2001.
INDICTMENT:   PETER G. PETERSON BIO: C.E.O. of the Blackstone Group, one of three lease-holders (along with Banc of America Securities and the General Motors Acceptance Corporation) of World Trade Center Building 7 on 9/11/01, thus sharing in unquestioning receipt of $861 million in insurance payments for the demolished WTC 7 (February 2002); also Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and the Council on Foreign Relations on 9/11/01; the Blackstone Group an investor in Kroll, Inc. (1993) and an investment of the American International Group insurance-firm (receiving $150 million, or a 7% stake, from A.I.G. in 1998), A.I.G. then headed by Maurice Greenberg, a former Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, and the Blackstone Group a partner with Kissinger Associates and A.I.G. from February 2000 onward (at the time the 'venture' was announced Peter G. Peterson was quoted in a press-release: "In this new global economy, with its requirements ... for cross-border mergers and acquisitions, for government privatizations of major industries and for restructuring of industries battered by the recent global financial crisis, we believe each of these entities bring some special knowledge and expertise to the table. We at Blackstone very much look forward to working with AIG and Kissinger Associates and capitalizing on these opportunities.").

PETER G. PETERSON
www.GlobalResearch.ca/articles/CHO403B.html
www.Demopedia.democraticunderground.com/index.php/Peter_J._Peterson
www.Bookstore.petersoninstitute.org/book-store/3837.html
www.JustAnotherBlowback.blogspot.com/2006/10/911-revolution-in-military-affairs.html

Global Military Chemtrail & HAARP Operations are Causing or Adding to Global Warming

The United Nations' Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and "carbon tax" advocates don't want you to know that covert experiments like combining CHEMTRAILS and HAARP experiments can actually cause the atmosphere to heat bringing into question the honesty of listing rising atmospheric CO2 as the primary cause of Global Warming.

Chemtrail spraying is an enormous global operation that was addressed by Dennis Kucinch in HB 2977 where he specifically listed "Chemtrails" as an "exotic" weapon. This astounding secret goes on every day in plain sight with those milky white streks coming out of the jet tanker aircraft at high altitude. -- Concerns about CO2 and pollution vanish when we calculate the carbon footprint of hundreds of tanker aircraft fling all day to deliver an aerosol spray that is demonstrated to HEAT the atmosphere by trapping warm air at lower altitude. Chemtrails have nothing to do with preventing Global WArming and everything to do with the secret and criminal manipulation of the atmosphere.

Russia has complained that the 2010 Summer heat wave may be caused by US geo-engineering operations.(ie..HAARP/CHEMTRAILS)



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lM5d30IBr1Q
________________________________________________________

May 10, 2010 -
http://coto2.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/case_orange-5-10-2010-belfort-chemtrails.pdf

Atmospheric Geoengineering: Weather Manipulation, Contrails and Chemtrails
A Review of the "Case Orange" report
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=20369

Toxic Cabin Air Events "Aerotoxins" are Common in passenger jet Travel.
A published study by the Association of Flight Attendants’ lead safety officer, Judith Murawski, CIH, conservatively estimated that a bleed air fume event occurred approximately six times per week in the United States over the past four years. But since Chemtrails probably cause no immediate symptoms but gradually accumulate in frequent flyers to cause more insideous health problems.
http://www.braytonlaw.com/news/legalnews/082609_bleed_air_system.htm
Gainesville Chemtrails
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5yzQpifmV0

2010/07/30

A 2001 BBC Interview Reveals Israel is Dictating US War Policy

BBC Interview from 9/11/2001 reveals Israel has been dictating US War Policy and troop deployment since the 9/11 attacks.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IthybCeFTjg&feature=player_embedded
______________________________________________________________
Government Officials who hold US/ Isreali Dual Citizenship as of Jan, 2009

Attorney General - Michael Mukasey
Head of Homeland Security - Michael Chertoff
Chairman Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board - Richard Perle
Deputy Defense Secretary (Former) - Paul Wolfowitz
Under Secretary of Defense - Douglas Feith
National Security Council Advisor - Elliott Abrams
Vice President Dick Cheney’s Chief of Staff (Former) - “Scooter” Libby
White House Deputy Chief of Staff - Joshua Bolten
Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs - Marc Grossman
Director of Policy Planning at the State Department - Richard Haass
U.S.Trade Representative (Cabinet-level Position) - Robert Zoellick
Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board - James Schlesinger
UN Representative (Former) - John Bolton
Under Secretary for Arms Control - David Wurmser
Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board - Eliot Cohen
Senior Advisor to the President - Steve Goldsmith
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary - Christopher Gersten
Assistant Secretary of State - Lincoln Bloomfield
Deputy Assistant to the President - Jay Lefkowitz
White House Political Director - Ken Melman
National Security Study Group - Edward Luttwak
Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board - Kenneth Adelman
Defense Intelligence Agency Analyst (Former) - Lawrence (Larry) Franklin
National Security Council Advisor - Robert Satloff
President Export-Import Bank - Mel Sembler
US Deputy Assistant Secretary, Administration for Children and Families - Christopher Gersten
Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development for Public Affairs - Mark Weinberger
White House Speechwriter - David Frum
White House Spokesman (Former) - Ari Fleischer
Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board - Henry Kissinger
Deputy Secretary of Commerce - Samuel Bodman
Under Secretary of State for Management - Bonnie Cohen
Director of Foreign Service Institute - Ruth Davis
Source: http://www.dailypaul.com/node/78153
________________________________________________

This transcript is produced from the teletext subtitles that are generated live for Newsnight. It has been checked against the programme as broadcast, however Newsnight can accept no responsibility for any factual inaccuracies. We will be happy to correct serious errors.


JEREMY VINE: Tuesday 9/11/2001
Let's speak to Elaine Showalter who is from New Jersey, living here now, but you have family in New York. What went through your mind seeing those pictures again?

ELAINE SHOWALTER:
It's been a terrifying day that will live in infamy. I think the worst of it was when it was happening. I was on Oxford Street and trying to think about how long it was going to go on. You could not be sure whether there would be attacks in Chicago, Seattle, Pittsburgh, the rest of the country. But I think that Americans recover from these things incredibly fast and even by this time the recovery has begun.

VINE:
You were contacting family and friends in New York?

SHOWALTER:
Yes. Mostly by the internet, which is a big help because all the telephone lines are tied up. We had e-mail and everybody called back and forth and messages are coming in. People are posting all kinds of messages on the Net of help and support.

VINE:
Let's speak to Richard Perle, who was close to President George Bush Jnr and was also Assistant Secretary of Defence under Ronald Reagan. People have spoken about this as an act of war. Is that how you see it?

RICHARD PERLE:
Clearly it is an act of war, both in terms of its magnitude and its purpose. Behind these acts of terror are the states which support terrorism - the states which provide the recruitment, the organisation, the sanctuary, the planning, the training, the logistics, the money. This could not happen without state support and state sponsorship. The United States must now do something which it has been reluctant to do, and that is hold the states accountable that permit this kind of terrorism to take place.

VINE:
Steven Simon, you are a former member of the US National Security Council. On the point of how this could happen, a lot of people have been saying it ought to be impossible for four planes to be hijacked simultaneously in the USA?

STEVEN SIMON:
It obviously is not. Smuggling weapons on to aeroplanes in the US is not impossible. There are a huge number of passengers, they're shoves through hubs that are extremely crowded. It's very difficult under these circumstances for poorly paid and poorly motivated security personnel to detect every bit of contraband that somebody is trying to smuggle on to an aeroplane.

VINE:
Would you ever have thought four simultaneous hijacks would be possible?

SIMON:
I never would have thought anyone would have attempted it. But clearly you have a group here that is highly motivated, very determined to do this, very well organised, enjoys excellent communications and probably has some practice.

VINE:
Ehud Barak is also here, the former Israeli Prime Minister. What did you think, Mr Barak, watching those pictures again?

EHUD BARAK:
It's a clear act of war. I believe that Tony Blair put it correctly. It is a time for action, not for just interviews, and a time for action by the whole world community, co-ordinating a concerted effort in on the level of diplomatic economy, but more than anything else, intelligence and operations to launch a full-scale struggle against world terror. It is all our Western civilisation is now under attack. No way to ignore it, we know the names of these rogue countries, we know the names of the organisations. The intelligence community know to tell us where they are deployed and it is a time for action, even if it is going to be a very tough and painful and maybe struggle that will stretch over a few years.

VINE:
Were you surprised it could happen?

BARAK:
I was not surprised by the attempt to destroy the twin towers - it already happened. But the combination and simultaneous effect of different places or different kind of aeroplanes were hijacked at the same time in a co-ordinated way is quite surprising.

VINE:
James Rubin, former Assistant Secretary of State, an attack on the centres of power, military, financial and political?

JAMES RUBIN:
This was an attack on the United States, but I think it is important for us not to lose the larger picture. This was an attack on civilisation, the World Trade Center is the centre of Western civilisation where all the countries of the world trade in finance, industry, in all sorts of products. They are going to be Japanese and Italian and Africans and Asians working in those buildings or conducting some kind of commerce who will have been killed by these terrorists. It is an attack on American symbols of power, but more importantly it is an attack on the civilised world and now the civilised world has to get together and say, "who are these uncivilised people who are prepared to do this?" and get together and respond.

VINE:
What will have been the reaction of people who are in the job that you were in and other people in similar government jobs to what has happened?

RUBIN:
I think that government jobs are stressful enough as it is but I can't begin to imagine the stress going on right now. I sat through a lot of stressful times but I think they pale in comparison to this kind of attack on the United States in such a dramatic way and having to leave all their buildings and get relocated. But I also believe that 24, 48 hours from now you are going to see people back in their offices, you're going to see the normal functioning's of government, you're going to see a redouble determination and I think you're going to see a response from the American people to the realisation that the outside world can affect us. Often, the American people seem to think they're isolated and it has been proven beyond doubt forever that the United States can't stand isolated.

VINE:
Let's hear from Khaled Hroub, who's a Middle East expert, who is Palestinian. We were hearing there a different reactions among Arabs to what has happened. How do you read that?

KHALED HROUB:
This clearly reflects some degree of dismay and frustration among the Palestinians and many Arabs to the American policy towards the Middle East, maybe peace process and other issues, like Iraq and Sudan. But, what I would like to say, we shouldn't put this horrific act into a clash of civilisation perspective. What if the actors of this act turned out to be from within Western civilisation, like Oklahoma City bomber? This is a possibility and what I can see from all the reporting today is there is some sort of strong assumption that those who committed this tragic act came from outside the Western civilisation, either from Afghanistan or Middle Eastern country. We have to wait and see and not to jump into some conclusions otherwise we are going to be in some sort of difficult situation to understand.

VINE:
We'll come back to some of that. We are just getting reports now of attacks, tracer fire in Kabul and we will bring you any further details of that as we get them. Richard Perle, let me bring you in on that point before we move on. Reports of some attacks explosions in Kabul. Any knowledge of what that might be?

PERLE:
No, I have no knowledge of it, but if it is retaliation against Osama Bin Laden it is long overdue and should be just the beginning of retribution against the state sponsors of terrorism.

VINE:
Because it is thought that Osama Bin Laden, who has been linked to this all through the day, is somewhere in Afghanistan and shielded by the Taliban regime there?

PERLE:
He is, but he works with other governments as well and until we come to grips with government support for terrorism, we will be vulnerable to attacks even on this scale. This could not be done without governments that assisted in training pilot, in moving people and resources and providing intelligence.

VINE:
Thank you to all of you.

_________________________________________________________

IRAN: Another Brick in the Wall by the Blurred Vision Band

Blurred Vision


Join Blurred Vision's Facebook page to connect with the band!
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/pages/Blurred-Vision/69014127393?v=wall&ref=ts
Download the single to Support AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

 


Song-1  "Another Brick in the Wall" Pink Floyd
Blurred Vision are in the studio with legendary Rock producer Terry Brown, recording new material including their first original release single!

Song-2 " FIVE " -
The boys of Blurred Vision - by Mitra Sadrameli and Tandees Tanavoli - The Iranian September 15, 2003


More:
http://www.iranian.com/Music/BlurredVision/index.html
http://surfing-the-apocalypse.blogspot.com/2010/02/canadianiranian-rock-band-blurred.html

2010/07/29

Media Blitz Uses Phony Nuclear Panic as Excuse to Invade IRAN/PAKISTAN

On November 10, 2001, BBC reported that Bin Laden never threatened to use nuclear weapons as was  dishonestly reported in the US media. Source:  http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1648572.stm

Arch-terrorist Osama Bin Laden "may have been killed", since there is little information to suggest he is alive, Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari said on Monday.

Neither Pakistani nor American intelligence experts have detected traces of Bin Laden since the Qatar-based Al-Jazeera aired an audio recording of his voice in March, Zardari said, and even that recording has not been confirmed as Bin Laden’s voice.

Zardari said his advisers believed there was substance to the rumors of his death, but he could not confirm this.

There have been several reports over the last few years suggesting Bin Laden, 52, could be dead, and others regarding his ailing health. None of the reports have been substantiated.

It is believed the terror chief is hiding in the mountainous region that straddles the Pakistan-Afghanistan border.

U.S. State Department Spokesman Robert Wood said the U.S. had "no information" as to whether Bin Laden was dead or alive. “We will continue to hunt Osama Bin Laden until we can capture him or bring justice to him,” Wood said.

An editorial in the London-based Al-Quds Al-‘Arabi suggested that whoever leaked the rumor of his death wanted to prompt Bin Laden to produce a new video to prove he was still alive.

“They hope this will provide more information on his whereabouts or hideout, which will help bring about his arrest.”

Zardari’s comments could also be a message to the U.S. that the mastermind behind terrorism in Pakistan is in fact not alive, Al-Quds Al-‘Arabi said.

The U.S. has been pressuring Islamabad to take tougher measures against terrorism within its border.

However, the editorial’s author believes rumors of his death are premature.

“The death of the Al-Qa’ida leader is not so far-fetched, and he will depart at some point, whether as a result of a disease, an assassination or in clashes with the numerous intelligence agencies around the world that are pursuing him” the editorial said.

“But if he dies, it will be announced officially by the organization, the same way they already announced the deaths of several lower-level leaders.”

An official announcement of his death has to be made, he wrote, in order to solve legal issues such as inheritance laws and the legal status of the widow.

There is increasing concern in the international community that terrorists such as those in Bin Laden’s Al-Qa’ida organization and the hard-line Taliban will get their hands on Pakistan’s nuclear weapons.

Last week, the Taliban managed to reach an area located approximately 100 kilometers from the capital Islamabad before being repelled.

Zardari ruled out the possibility of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of the Taliban.

“The nuclear capability of Pakistan is in safe hands,” he said.

The Pakistani government said the Taliban had completely withdrawn from the district, but reports quoting local eyewitnesses said Taliban fighters were still present on the ground.

The Pakistan army killed 46 Taliban fighters over the past two days in northwest Pakistan’s Lower Dir district.

The Taliban is warning it will attack government forces in the North West Frontier Province (NWFP) if the government does not stop its offensive.

The Taliban has suspended talks with the provincial government in the wake of the clashes.

The government in NWFP struck a deal with the Taliban under which Islamic Law, or Shari’a would be introduced to the area in return for a suspension in Taliban hostilities.

[Source: http://www.themedialine.org/news/news_detail.asp?NewsID=24972
Photo: We are unable to ascertain whether the photo is genuine or not. -Editor]
_________________________________________________
SOURCES:
Probe into 'Bin Laden death' leak
"President Jacques Chirac has ordered an inquiry into the leak of a French secret service memo claiming that Osama Bin Laden had died."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/5374160.stm

Benazir Bhutto Confirms that Osama Bin Laden is Dead (Video)
"In an interview only months before her death, Bhutto, possibly unintentionally, admitted that Bin Laden had been killed. She refers to someone as "the man who killed Osama Bin Laden""
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8120236576648647371

Bin Laden may be dead, but living on through old sound bites
"U.S. intelligence agencies are beginning to suspect that Al Qaida leader Osama Bin Laden is dead after all, despite a recent audio tape exhorting Al Qaida terrorists in Iraq."
http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2008/me_terror_02_11.asp

Israeli intelligence: Bin Laden is dead, heir has been chosen
"Osama Bin Laden appears to be dead but his colleagues have decided that Al Qaida and its insurgency campaign against the United States will continue, Israeli intelligence sources said."
http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2002/me_terrorism_10_16.html

Osama bin Laden: A dead nemesis perpetuated by the US government
"Osama bin Laden is dead. The news first came from sources in Afghanistan and Pakistan almost six months ago: the fugitive died in December [2001] and was buried in the mountains of southeast Afghanistan. Pakistan's president, Pervez Musharraf, echoed the information. The remnants of Osama's gang, however, have mostly stayed silent, either to keep Osama's ghost alive or because they have no means of communication."
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/osama_dead.html 

If bin Laden was dead, Would the U.S. admit it?
http://www.welfarestate.com/binladen/funeral/

Report: Bin Laden Already Dead
"Usama bin Laden has died a peaceful death due to an untreated lung complication, the Pakistan Observer reported, citing a Taliban leader who allegedly attended the funeral of the Al Qaeda leader."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,41576,00.html
Source: http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/Voices.php/2009/04/29/osama-bin-laden-believed-dead-by-pak-int


Mr. Cheney, "Do the Orders Still Stand?" (Who was that military aide?)

Mr. Cheney, "Do the Orders Still Stand?" Who was that military aide?
Submitted by jimd3100 on Wed, 07/28/2010 - 2:10am
He seems to be Naval Aide Douglas Cochrane. I'll get to how he is identified in a moment. First.....

The 9-11 commission has this scenario in the PEOC, instead of the one described by N Mineta.....

"At some time between 10:10 and 10:15, a military aide told the Vice President and others that the aircraft was 80 miles out. Vice President Cheney was asked for authority to engage the aircraft. His reaction was described by Scooter Libby as quick and decisive, "in about the time it takes a batter to decide to swing." The Vice President authorized fighter aircraft to engage the inbound plane. He told us he based this authorization on his earlier conversation with the President. The military aide returned a few minutes later, probably between 10:12 and 10:18, and said the aircraft was 60 miles out. He again asked for authorization to engage. The Vice President again said yes"
http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report_Ch1.htm

The person telling Cheney the plane is 80 miles out...60 miles out...etc...is described as his "Military Aide". This would be the "young man" as Mineta described him. Unless there are two different people telling Cheney the plane is 80 miles out...the plane is 60 miles out....this seems extremely unlikely. So who is this military aide? I'll get to him shortly.

First,this may or may not be true, but the fact is Cheney can't prove it(the part of him getting shoot down authorization), what Cheney is doing is protecting the President, along with Sec of Def Rumsfeld, who are the only two people authorized to issue shoot down orders. Neither one did so, and conspired together not to.................

"Prior to 9/11, it was understood that an order to shoot down a commercial aircraft would have to be issued by the National Command Authority (a phrase used to describe the president and secretary of defense)." page 17/46 http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf

"The President apparently spoke to Secretary Rumsfeld for the first time that morning shortly after 10:00. No one can recall the content of this conversation, but it was a brief call in which the subject of shootdown authority was not discussed." http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf
That's called selective amnesia.

"At 10:10, the pilots over Washington were emphatically told "negative clearance to shoot." Shootdown authority was first communicated to NEADS at 10:31."
http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report_Ch1.htm

I mean....it's right there. The official story is probably right, in that, the passengers having to take over 93, because no one was authorizing any shoot down order, until the attacks were over. It's a proveable fact that no shoot down orders were given until after the last plane (Flight 93) went down. They had no intention of disrupting what they needed to happen. It's not believable that a pilot would take it upon themselves to kill a plane of civilians without authorization.

Here's evidence of a stand down. If the President gave Cheney an order, and they claim it was a shoot down order they can't prove it. They should be able to do that. Instead the proof indicates the order was never given during the attacks (Flight 93 went down at 10:03 or 10:06)....

"Fleischer’s 10:20 note is the first mention of shootdown authority. See White House notes,Ari Fleischer notes, Sept. 11, 2001; see also Ari Fleischer interview (Apr. 22, 2004)."
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Notes.pdf

"The Vice President's military aide told us he believed the Vice President spoke to the President just after entering the conference room, but he did not hear what they said. Rice, who entered the room shortly after the Vice President and sat next to him, remembered hearing him inform the President, "Sir, the CAPs are up. Sir, they're going to want to know what to do." Then she recalled hearing him say, "Yes sir." She believed this conversation occurred a few minutes, perhaps five, after they entered the conference room."
http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report_Ch1.htm

"Among the sources that reflect other important events of that morning, there is no documentary evidence for this call, but the relevant sources are incomplete."
http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report_Ch1.pdf

This is where the military aide's testimoney would be crucial, what was the order he was given? But again......even if he says it was a shoot down order, it came from Cheney, and he and Bush (who insisted on testifying together) can't prove it, Cheney is protecting Bush and Rumsfeld both, who never did issue shoot down orders.

"The Vice President was logged calling the President at 10:18 for a two-minute conversation that obtained the confirmation. On Air Force One, the President's press secretary was taking notes; Ari Fleischer recorded that at 10:20, the President told him that he had authorized a shootdown of aircraft if necessary."
http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report_Ch1.htm

"Fleischer’s 10:20 note is the first mention of shootdown authority. See White House notes,Ari Fleischer notes, Sept. 11, 2001; see also Ari Fleischer interview (Apr. 22, 2004)."
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Notes.pdf

That's when Bush issued the shoot down order. 10:20, and Rumsfeld never did.
"Bush remained in the classroom for "five to seven minutes" after learning of the second crash as the children around him continued reading. He had his first conversation with Cheney at about 9:15."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50745-2004Jun17_2.html

But wasn't giving shoot down authorization. How come? How many buildings does it take? How about if the pentagon gets hit, how about then? Still.....Nope.......

"Bush and Cheney spoke again at 9:45, while Bush was on the tarmac aboard Air Force One. By that time, both towers of the World Trade Center were aflame and the Pentagon had been hit."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50745-2004Jun17_2.html

Pretty outrageous. Still, no intention on giving shoot down authority. If any orders were given, they were stand down orders.

The last plane went down at 10:03 to 10:06...most likely by the passengers. These passengers were in a no win situation, but surely prevented 9/11 from being even more catastrophic than it already was, the nations capital was it's target, and these traitors sure weren't going to stop it.

"Fleischer’s 10:20 note is the first mention of shootdown authority. See White House notes,Ari Fleischer notes, Sept. 11, 2001; see also Ari Fleischer interview (Apr. 22, 2004)."
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Notes.pdf

"The President apparently spoke to Secretary Rumsfeld for the first time that morning shortly after 10:00. No one can recall the content of this conversation, but it was a brief call in which the subject of shootdown authority was not discussed."
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf

Here's Condi Rice lieing to you.....
"Q At one point that morning, the President gave an order to the Combat Air Patrol pilots giving them permission to shoot down U.S. commercial airliners. How did that decision come about, and how did you take on board the gravity of that decision?

DR. RICE: The President did give the order to shoot down a civilian plane if it was not responding properly. And it was authority through channels by Secretary Rumsfeld, and the Vice President passed the request, the President said yes."
http://www.scribd.com/doc/16571537/T3-B11-EOP-Produced-Documents-Vol-III...
John Farmer exposes this false statement in his book "The Ground Truth"......

"The authority was not requested through channels, when Secretary Rumsfeld joined the Air Threat Conference Call at 10:30 and was told about the shoot down order by Vice President Cheney, he was clearly unaware of it. Wether the vice president had requested prior authorization from the president is disputed, but uncorroborated by the records of the day. page 260
http://www.amazon.com/Ground-Truth-Untold-America-Attack/dp/1594488940/r

Cheney made the order on his own (no matter what it was) The first Presidential authorization came at 10:20, according to Arie Fletcher's notes and he was taking notes for this reason, to keep track of what time things were happening for historical reasons.

"Fleischer’s 10:20 note is the first mention of shootdown authority. See White House notes,Ari Fleischer notes, Sept. 11, 2001; see also Ari Fleischer interview (Apr. 22, 2004)."
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Notes.pdf

Remember:
"At some time between 10:10 and 10:15, a military aide told the Vice President and others that the aircraft was 80 miles out. Vice President Cheney was asked for authority to engage the aircraft. His reaction was described by Scooter Libby as quick and decisive, "in about the time it takes a batter to decide to swing." The Vice President authorized fighter aircraft to engage the inbound plane."
http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report_Ch1.htm

If he did authorize a shoot down order (which is debateable), he told the President later, after he did it, if he didn't issue a shoot down, he was given the authorization at this later time......

"The Vice President was logged calling the President at 10:18 for a two-minute conversation that obtained the confirmation. On Air Force One, the President's press secretary was taking notes; Ari Fleischer recorded that at 10:20, the President told him that he had authorized a shootdown of aircraft if necessary."
http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report_Ch1.htm

"His reaction was described by Scooter Libby as quick and decisive, "in about the time it takes a batter to decide to swing." The Vice President authorized fighter aircraft to engage the inbound plane."
http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report_Ch1.htm

This is not what Mineta said by a long shot. Mineta said he didn't even know it was a shootdown order, he makes it clear he that he heard what Cheney said and quotes him. (Whipped his neck around and said "of coarse the order still stands"...etc...)

Libby has already been convicted in a court of Law of lying under oath to protect Cheney. So this story seems false and contrived. This Military Aide's testimony is important. So who is he?

The person telling Cheney the plane is 80 miles out...60 miles out...etc...is described as his "Military Aide". This would be the "young man" as Mineta described him. Unless there are two different people telling Cheney the plane is 80 miles out...the plane is 60 miles out....this seems extememly unlikely. So who is this military aide?

Check the footnotes, on this scenario, and the only one that applies to Cheney and the "Military Aide" would be this Douglas Cochrane.....

"215. Douglas Cochrane meeting (Apr. 16, 2004); Condeleeza Rice meeting (Feb. 7, 2004). For Rice entering after the Vice President, see USSS report,“Executive Summary:U.S. Secret Service Timeline of Events, September 11–October 3, 2001,” Oct. 3, 2001, p. 2; Carl Truscott interview (Apr. 15, 2004)."
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Notes.pdf

We know who Rice is. Truscott is a member of the secret service because....
"interviews of the 3 USSS agents in proximity to the President (Eddie Marenzel) and VP (Truscott and Zotto) are still on hold."
http://www.scribd.com/doc/15740811/DM-B8-Team-8-Fdr-Email-From-Hyde-to-F...

Yes, they wanted to talk with this Military Aide as seen in this released 9-11 commission memo....

"March 2, 2004 - New Requests:
(2)VP Military Aide (I believe his last name is Cochrane): The person at the Vice President's side in the PEOC who should have been intimately involved in the military communications chain is his military aide."
http://www.scribd.com/doc/15740811/DM-B8-Team-8-Fdr-Email-From-Hyde-to-F...
They did talk with him according to the 9-11 commission footnotes, a month and a half after that memo....

"215. Douglas Cochrane meeting (Apr. 16, 2004);"
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Notes.pdf
But we can't see what was said in that interview yet.....

"ACCESS RESTRICTED
The item identified below has been withdrawn from this file:
Folder Title: White House Timelines"
http://www.scribd.com/doc/14274489/DH-B3-White-House-Timelines-Fdr-Entir...

This is BS. It's 2010 and we still can't see any part of his interview? This needs to be declassified and released.

Yup, he's military....but not so young...you have to remember Mineta was around 71 at the time......

"Cochrane was selected to serve as the Naval Aide to the Vice President in November of 2000 and served Vice President Richard B. Cheney until December 2002. He was commended by President George W. Bush for distinguished service as Naval Aide and Emergency Action Officer, on and about Sept. 11, 2001."
http://cache.zoominfo.com/CachedPage/?archive_id=0&page_id=1146282991&pa...

Source: http://911blogger.com/news/2010-07-28/do-orders-still-stand-who-was-he
A Response to Chip Berlet’s “Toxic to Democracy”


Response to Chip Berlet’s “Toxic to Democracy: Conspiracy Theories, Demonization, and Scapegoating”
By Peter Phillips and Mickey Huff
Media Freedom Foundation/Project Censored

In his recent essay “Toxic to Democracy,” Political Research Associates (PRA) Senior Analyst Chip Berlet uses the very same methods of demonization by association that he so strongly opposes. Berlet convolutes historical context, ideological differences, and progressives vis-à-vis extreme conservative/neo-con/libertarians in a diatribe of meaninglessness.

Berlet lumps valid academic research on State Crimes Against Democracy (SCADs) in with anti-Semitic jingoism and far right wing extremism. He suggests that any research that even implies some sort of conspiracy is dangerous and suspect, seemingly forgetting a long list of proven US and other government conspiracies (SCADs) including: Operation Mockingbird, COINTELPRO, Gulf of Tonkin “Incident,” October Surprise, CIA-Contra Dark Alliance, Iran-Contra, WMDs and Iraq Invasion, and the overthrow of governments in Iran, Guatemala, Haiti, Chile, Greece, Indonesia, Panama, and many others.

Outrageously, Berlet categorizes progressive intellectuals such as Peter Dale Scott, Michael Parenti, David Ray Griffin, Michel Chossudovsky, and by innuendo the two of us, as dangerous conspiracists. He uses a straw person technique by positing former LaRouche analyst Webster Tarpley, and the Church of God Evangelistic Association founder David J. Smith in the same category as the progressive intellectuals listed above.

At the end of his essay, Berlet attempts to distinguish between people who do power structure research such as G. William Domhoff—who served on Peter Phillips’ dissertation committee regarding the Bohemian Grove in 1994— along with Holly Sklar, former PRA associate and author of a study on the Trilateral Commission compared to those who see elite networks as potential places of planning for self serving advantages. Of course, elites conspire to maximize their power and profits whenever possible. Corporate boardrooms are rife with such activity and the resulting actions/PR manipulations—as recently evidenced by British Petroleum. That does not mean one should simply dismiss researching the lies and manipulations of the powerful because it might imply a conspiracy, especially when the lies fail to explain how a 47-story steel frame building (WTC Building 7) collapsed in its own footprint at freefall speed on September 11, 2001, or how a scientific, peer-reviewed, academic journal discovered unreacted nano-thermite in the dust from the World Trade Centers (The Open Chemical Physics Journal).

While we have solid respect for the long tradition of research into extreme right wing and racist organizations for which PRA is well known, we are most dismayed by Chip Berlet’s reactionary dismissal of academic research into conspiracies/State Crimes Against Democracy by long time progressive intellectuals.

Peter Phillips is a Professor of Sociology at Sonoma State University and President of Media Freedom Foundation/Project Censored

Mickey Huff is an Associate Professor of History at Diablo Valley College and Director of Project Censored/Media Freedom Foundation

See Berlet’s essay “Toxic to Democracy” at http://www.publiceye.org/conspire/toxic2democracy/

Condoleezza Rice/Aretha Franklin Concert Protested by 9/11 Truthers

Condoleezza Rice/Aretha Franklin Concert Protested by 9/11 Truthers
Published July 28, 2010 by:
Mark Whittington

While Condoleezza Rice and Aretha Franklin made beautiful music inside the Mann Music Center at Fairmount Park in Philadelphia, two or three 9/11 truthers gathered outside to protest. The only thing I can say is, cool sound track, crazy people with too much time on their hands.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoTegjWPd2U&feature=player_embedded

Source: http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/5631030/condoleezza_ricearetha_franklin_concert.html?cat=47   

2010/07/28

NORAD Exercise a Year Before 9/11 Simulated a Pilot Crashing a Plane into a NYC Skyscraper

Tuesday, 27 July 2010

NORAD Exercise a Year Before 9/11 Simulated a Pilot Trying to Crash a Plane into a New York Skyscraper--The United Nation Headquarters

The North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) held a major training exercise in October 2000 that included the scenario of a person stealing a large jet plane, which they planned to crash into the United Nations headquarters building--a 39-story high-rise in New York, just a few miles away from the World Trade Center. Furthermore, a NORAD exercise in June that year included one scenario in which a plane was hijacked with the intention of crashing it into the White House, and another in which a transcontinental flight was hijacked with the intention of crashing the plane into the Statue of Liberty, only a short distance from where the WTC stood.

The existence of these exercise scenarios was revealed in August 2004 by General Richard Myers, at that time the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, during a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Senator Mark Dayton (D-MN) asked, "Did NORAD"-- the military organization responsible for defending U.S. airspace--"conduct exercises or develop scenarios, prior to September 11, 2001, to test a military reaction to an aircraft hijacking which appeared destined to result in a suicide crash into a high-value target?" In response, Myers outlined "five exercise hijack events" that NORAD had practiced for between November 1999 and October 2000, which all "included a suicide crash into a high-value target." [1] Yet the details of these chilling scenarios, which were like premonitions of the attacks on New York and Washington that lay ahead, failed to receive the public attention they deserved.

OCTOBER 2000 SCENARIO: STOLEN PLANE TARGETS UN BUILDING
The scenario that included an attempt to crash a plane into the UN headquarters was practiced for twice--on October 16 and October 23, 2000--as part of an exercise called Vigilant Guardian. This annual exercise was conducted by NORAD, and all of the organization, including its headquarters and its three air defense sectors in the continental United States, participated. [2]

The scenario practiced for on October 16 was that, "Due to recent arrests involving illegal drug trafficking in Maine, an individual steals a Federal Express plane and plans a suicide attack into the United Nations building in New York City." The October 23 scenario, according to Myers's summary, was almost identical. It was based around "weapons of mass destruction directed at the United Nations," and in it, "an individual steals a Federal Express aircraft and plans a suicide attack on the United Nations building in New York City." [3] (At the time of this exercise, Federal Express was flying mostly the MD-11 and the DC-10, both large jet aircraft. Presumably one of those planes was the type considered in the scenarios. [4])

The next Vigilant Guardian--for the year 2001--was actually being conducted at the time the 9/11 attacks occurred. [5] One can only imagine what NORAD personnel must have thought when the real-world events of September 11 so closely resembled a scenario they had encountered in the previous instance of that day's exercise--a suicide pilot trying to crash a large jet plane into a New York skyscraper.

JUNE 2000 SCENARIOS: HIJACKERS PLAN TO CRASH PLANES INTO WHITE HOUSE AND STATUE OF LIBERTY
On June 5, 2000, the Continental United States NORAD Region (CONR) was conducting an exercise called Falcon Indian, in which its three air defense sectors in the continental U.S. took part. [6] Two scenarios were practiced for that day in which hijackers planned to crash an aircraft into a well-known, "high-value" target in New York or Washington.

One scenario involved a Learjet being hijacked, and "maintaining tight formation with [a] Canadair airliner, loaded with explosives," according to Myers's summary. (It is unclear from that summary whether it was the Learjet or the Canadair plane that had explosives on board.) The hijackers "planned to crash" the Learjet "into the White House." In the other scenario, a "Communist Party faction" hijacked an aircraft bound from the western to the eastern United States. The hijackers had "high explosives on board," and intended "to crash into the Statue of Liberty." [7]

NOVEMBER 1999 SCENARIO: TERRORISTS PLAN TO CRASH HIJACKED PLANE INTO UN BUILDING
The fifth scenario Myers described was from an earlier Falcon Indian, held in November 1999. Again, NORAD's three air defense sectors in the continental U.S. took part in the CONR exercise. And, again, the exercise included a scenario based around the hijacking of a transcontinental aircraft flying from the western to the eastern United States. In the simulation, a China Airlines plane bound from Los Angeles to JFK International Airport in New York was "hijacked east of Colorado Springs by five terrorists." If the plane was not intercepted by the U.S. military, the hijackers intended "to crash into [the] United Nations building." [8]

Read More:  http://shoestring911.blogspot.com/2010/07/norad-exercise-year-before-911.html

2010/07/26

Why Progressives Should Press for 9/11 Truth on WTC-7

Progressivism is rooted in the belief that a just government is capable of improving the lot of all within society. As such, it is a rejection of Social Darwinism, the position taken by too many of the rich and powerful.
Specific goals include:
- Remove corruption and undue influence from government through the taming of bosses and political machines;
- Include more people more directly in the political process;
- A conviction that government must play a role to solve social problems and establish fairness in economic matters.

Source: US History - http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1061.html  

Why Progressives Should Press for Building-7 Exposure
Dwain Deets - July 24, 2010

Progressives should press for exposure of the problems related to the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7. (An abbreviated set of seven of these problems are available at the 7problemswithbuilding7.info website.) Thus far, these problems have been mostly hidden from the public. Exposure could provide a rallying point for efforts to bring accountability and justice in America. It can bring clarity to the press for transparency in government, and it can expose corporate Machiavellian manipulations that have clearly gone on relative to Building 7's collapse.

Transparency in government is badly needed, both within the Administration and in Congress. The happenings related to Building 7 make this abundantly clear.

Within the Administration, a number of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests have been submitted seeking records on the Building 7 collapse-analysis data. The final report on World Trade Center 7 was issued by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in November 2008; however, going on two years later, most requests have been denied. Most troubling is the reason given for denial. The Director of NIST has determined that release of the information "might jeopardize public safety." This reasoning is outrageous. If anything, not releasing the information might jeopardize public safety.

Congress is guilty of inhibiting transparency in government, for not insisting on accountability, by not holding any hearings on this subject. Apparently, to members of Congress, the collapse of Building 7 is a taboo subject. Yes, some members of Congress will listen to some of the troubling evidence involving the collapse, but the reasons given for not pursuing the matter are usually vague, such as there isn't a consensus this matter should be pursued.

Exposure of corporate Machiavellian manipulations relative to Building 7 is the other major reason this matter should be pursued. Major corporations in mainstream media, in major investment areas generally associated with Wall Street, and in the military/industrial complex should be parties of interest in this matter.

Mainstream media's collusion, for example, can be seen in the way the TV networks quickly let the collapse of Building 7 drop out of the news in the hours and days following the event. The visual image of the building descending at, what now has officially been acknowledged as a free-fall drop, should be a commonly-recognized image, but the obvious manipulations by the media has hidden that image from public view.

The failed financial giants Enron and Worldcom, mired in investigations of corporate fraud by the SEC prior to the Building 7 collapse, should have been brought to Justice by now. However, their records were "conveniently" housed in the SEC offices in Building 7. All these records were, apparently, lost. Why were these critical records not backed up at some other physical location? Isn't that standard procedure in both government and the industry?

And finally, is there not anyone interested in bringing accountability and justice to players within the Military/Industrial Complex? Profits abound from the War on Terror, all justified by the events of September 11, 2001. Many who have studied the available evidence feel the collapse of Building 7 is the Achilles heel in that day's events. Doesn't that at least warrant a new investigation of the Building 7 collapse? The ramifications would be so massive if it was found that the prior investigation was a fraud. It could bring into question the whole basis of the War on Terror, itself.

Aren't these reasons enough for progressives to set aside inhibitions they may have about looking into these matters? Isn't it important to have institutions we can have confidence in -- transparency in government that works as intended -- and corporate entities that don't trample the Main Street public?

Dwain Deets is a retired NASA flight research engineer. Was editor-in-chief of Secular Nation magazine (2006-2008). Engineer/writer for AE911Truth.
_______________________________________________________

______________________________________________________




Source: http://www.opednews.com/articles/Why-Progressives-Should-Pr-by-Dwain-Deets-100723-333.html

2010/07/25

Webster Tarpley - Obama Worse than Bush and more like Woodrow Wilson

GUNS and BUTTER
Webster Tarpley Interview, April 14th
LISTEN HERE:  http://kpfa.org/archive/id/60229

A five star rating for this program *****
 
"Obama and Civil Liberties" We discuss the possible civil liberties implications of Obama's West Point speech, and an historic parallel between Woodrow Wilson and Barack Obama. Most of the program focuses on the arrests and detention of so-called "homegrown terrorists" including Najibullah Zazi, the Bronx Bombers, the Fort Dix Six, the Liberty City 7 (aka the Miami Haitians), the Toronto 18, etc.; extensive discussion of the Ft. Hood shooter case and Tarpley's essay, "Nidal Malik Hasan of Virginia Tech, Bethesda and Fort Hood: A Major Patsy in a Drill Gone Live?".

2010/07/24

CHEMTRAILS: Whistlblower Pilot Shows Tanker Weaponizing the Atmosphere


A commercial pilot captures a video of a KC-10 Tanker releasing visible chemical compounds into the atmosphere at high altitude over Canadian Air Space.


.
The aircraft type (KC-10), manner of release and characteristics of the aerosol spray is hard evidence that these are CHEMTRAILS - A phenomenon of long white lines in the sky described by the informed observers since circa 1997. CHEMTRAILS is a term used in a 2001 Congressional Draft Bill by Rep., Dennis Kucinich where he described CHEMTRAILS as an EXOTIC WEAPONS SYTEM. Since 1997, these "WEAPONS" have been witnessed around the planet over the skies of a dozen countries that hold membership in NATO.  Source: HB 2977 Text  Section 7,B,ii "Chemtrails".

The visible aerosol has a typical "Chemtrail" iridescence and is neither a fuel dump nor a normal contrail. This and other videos have long ago debunked the disinformation that CHEMTRAILS are somehow normal "Contrails"...or "Persistant Contrails" - a term used to obfuscate the reality that the atmosphere has been heavily "WEAPONIZED"...but against Who?

The Pilot jokes that they're lucky to be above the tanker, otherwise they would be "dead". This is not a joke since many commercial aircraft do not filter cabin air that is "imported" from the atmosphere immediately outside the aircraft. As a result, the cabin of most passenger aircraft can become a "gas chamber" of Chemical toxins.  Source: "Aerotoxic Syndrome" is the unofficial name now being used to identify symptoms caused by breathing air contaminated with oil fumes leaking into aircraft cabins...".
(Note: The reference is to "oil fumes" with no mention of  "CHEMTAIL" toxins.)
Source: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/news-by-industry/healthcare/biotech/pharmaceuticals/Beware-frequent-fliers-Aircraft-cabin-air-can-be-toxic/articleshow/6090456.cms

NOTE: Most commercial aircraft produce "breathable" cabin air for passengers and crew by drawing in a compressed supply of it from the plane's engines. Typically, this "bleed air" is mixed with existing cabin air and re-circulated throughout the flight. In other words, the air in the passenger cabin is a mixture of re-circulated cabin air and fresh air that is compressed in the airplane engine. The problem is that the engine housing from where this air is drawn is often contaminated with toxic fumes from the hot oil used to lubricate the various moving parts of the engine. Sometimes so much oil mixes with air being drawn into the cabin that passengers will literally be able to see fumes and smoke filling the cabin - what is commonly referred to as a "fume event".


CHEMTRAILS EXPLAINED: This short video introduces Chemtrails and how they are used in conjunction with other military weapons to weaponize the atmosphere, control the weather, induce atmospheric warming... like nothing you could imagine.
Source: http://gators911truth.org/MOV-WX-WARFARE.html

WHAT IS THE FUTURE FOR EARTH'S ATMOSPHERE as a WEAPON? From the 2006 Air Force Vision document that replaces the 1997 version: "Our Space Warfare Center now emphasizes how to leverage the combination of space and atmospheric capabilities, and we’ve added space training to the air combat training at our Weapons School. Our information capabilities support operations across the entire aerospace domain. And we’re putting air, space and information operators into all our key commands and training courses, focusing on expanding and cross-flowing knowledge to maximize effectiveness."
THE DOCUMENT: Source: http://www.army.mil/thewayahead/afvision.pdf
___________________________________________________
More:
LINK BETWEEN HAARP and CHEMTRAILS ESTABLISHED: The HAARP patent includes a proposal to release large clouds of barium (CHEMTRAILS) in order to increase electron precipitation.
Source:  http://www.bariumblues.com/haarp_patent.htm

CHEMTRAILS EXPOSED: LEARN ABOUT COVERT OPS (In Plane Site) SPRAYING TOXIC BARIUM AEROSOLS TO WEAPONIZE EARTH'S ATMOSPHERE.
Source: http://www.bariumblues.com/
________________________________________________________
The History Channel documentary discusses Chemtrails and H.A.A.R.P. and how they may be used to weaponize Earth's atmosphere. So if you’ve ever wondered what chemtrails are and what they are for you need to see this video. -- This technology presents a serious challenge to those who support Al Gore’s version of Global Warming and the remedy of a CAP and TRADE tax. -- The documentary is a frank admission that chemtrails and Weather Warfare technology is causing or contributing to Global Warming: “The temperature of the sky is raised to over 100 deg. F. preventing the accumulation of water vapour that would otherwise form clouds and produce rainfall.” -- This stunning conclusion is not new, however Al Gore says the discussion is closed. All the while, Gore and the IPCC have consistently avoided discussion of Chemtrails, aerosols or any other alternate man-made causes of Global Warming, preferring to blame CO2 as the culprit by which to impose an involuntary, global tax.
Source: http://gators911truth.org/MOV-WX-WARFARE.html
Source:  http://justgetthere.us/blog/archives/History-Channel-Weather-Warfare.html
_________________________________________________________
DOWNLOAD and SHARE:
http://www.tankerenemy.com/
http://www.tanker-enemy.tv/