9/11 Without Tinfoil 3: The Next Level

[MichaelC]

Why is it that, in the Nick Berg video, the 'arabs' all are built like - and move like - big fat whitetrash american prison guards? And how come Berg is wearing the same orange prison jumpsuit that is the standard issue atttire in American prison? Just wondering..... Must be like Fintan pointed out - they're just telling us: "We did it and we will do it again and fuck you all!" Makes sense to me. But there's still more of 'us' than there is of 'them' Remember that. And take courage from it.

[Continuity]

indigitydogdignation said:

[indigitydogdignation]

[Continuity]

indigitydogdignation said:

[dilbert_g]

[indigitydogdignation]

[dilbert_g]

I always add that it was NOT to fight the Russians, he said it was to LURE the Russians in. AND that he said he'd do it all over again, that Orrin Hatch agreed, creating Al-Qaeda was a good idea. Sometimes I quote laughing Brz, "Regret What?!" "there IS NO GLOBAL ISLAM". And there isn't, he's right, except what the CIA funds.

I also add that not only did we fund Iran and ran BCCI (Al-Qaeda Bank of Pakistan set up by CIA), funding and support continued through the late 90's during the Clinton era. Not "Path to 9/11", joint military operations with Al-Qaeda, with private mercs MPRI and Pentagon officials working alongside Al-Qaeda. That's according to the United States Senate, but nobody knows about it, because the Repub leaders suppressed that. Look up Senate Republican Kosovo Report.

(Whether they look it up or not, it's a show stopper. It blows Blowback.)

I like to lean into the statement that Repubs chose to hit Clinton w Monica Lewinsky instead. I say it with a sneer. This is the opposite approach most libs have --- when Clinton lied, nobody died. Not true.

In other words, telling them the exact opposite of what they expect a liberal to say.

I've memorized roughly what I say about the Magdy Elamir case of an Al-Qaeda operative who got off free after embezzling govt money and sending $6 M offshore to Osama, because his defense lawyer was Whitewater prosecutor Michael Chertoff. (It was in the news, like the Univ of Texas paper and maybe a few others. Google Chertoff Magdy)

Anyhow, most people cannot argue much. I'll only throw in "no terrorists in planes" at the very end, if it goes that far, depending on the person. Like Fintan said, they expect you to argue buildings and controlled demo. Towers "Blown to Kingdom come" is one good remark from Morgan Reynolds, but I rarely get to that face to face.

I'd rather destroy the lies, than try to convince the truth. If interested, they can learn themselves. I link my Loose Change comments to wtc7.net but that's mostly too detailed to explain physics. I'd rather demand that THEY explain to ME how we supported Al-Qaeda for 25 years, after they were a known terrorist group, up to the Summer of 2001.

I guess it's a style that combines Chossudovsky and Jones, informed by the humor of B4N and the knowledge of psyops, and the fact that NPR is run by the CIA as well as all the others.

I tried to think about what I could explain in 30 sec or so, strong suit. The fact that the Pgon was hit after 90 minutes says a lot, even to military types. I would begin there, and maybe discuss other things later.

[Continuity]

Gary said:

[indigitydogdignation]

small correction: I had meant to say The Nation and Fox News were sometimes joined at the hip, though Mother Jones might be as well, for all I know.

Gary, I like your approach, especially now that I've heard some more details. Many of the people I'm speaking with wouldn't know where to find Kosovo on a map, so I tend to stick with things people can wrap their minds around, though I can see the shortcomings in pummeling educated types with wtc7 and all the up-in-the air physics.

[Rumpl4skn]

James The Baker Boy III was the guest on The Daily Show tonight, because he's flogging a new book, "Work Hard, Study... and Stay Out of Politics", titled after advice his father gave him.

Notable quotes:

On his allegiance to the Bush admin: "I'm not a government employee."

On whether the Iraq Group can be trusted: "We're bi-partisan committee."

[bulletin]

The patriotism of the "leaders" is off the table and they get to classify whatever they want for "national security reasons."

Traditional propaganda themes help make this possible:

Shared nationalism: For example when a politician says something like "We are winning in Iraq." The use of such a phrase implies that all Americans are on the same team and share the same goals. This simplification is effective because it suggests that political leaders do not have agendas contrary to those of the public.

Conflation: Supporting the civilian command is the same thing as supporting soldiers. Thus, failure to support the civilian command is the same thing as failure to support soldiers.

Authoritarianism: Failure to support the policies of the leaders is indicative of flawed citizenship and/or lack of patriotism.