Open Thread: Dog Days

-

powellbush.jpg
These pics should inspire some “open thread” chatting.
The first is clearly a comment on “body languange.” The next below misinterprets canine-eze as my read of “grrrrr, bark, woof” is that the dogs are just excited about the likelihood soon of new representation at the UN.
dog_sign.jpg
Open thread.

— Steve Clemons

Comments

61 comments on “Open Thread: Dog Days

  1. James says:

    I quit reading or even looking at or picking up a
    PM, way back in 1966 I believe.
    This was when a story about the first Russian space
    walk, it was the cover story.
    It said the first spacewalk by the Russians,Soviet
    Union…was actually filmed under water in Russia,
    the story went on to say the walk…did not happen!
    My, Popular Mechanics is a joke.
    The Russian space was and is for real!
    In fact! they are in space at this very moment and Yes, they still can walk in space! the Russians. Shame on you popular mechanics! under water? …

    Reply

  2. James says:

    I quit reading or even looking at or picking up a
    PM, way back in 1966 I believe.
    This was when a story about the first Russian space
    walk, it was the cover story.
    It said the first spacewalk by the Russians,Soviet
    Union…was actually filmed under water in Russia,
    the story went on to say the walk…did not happen!
    My, Popular Mechanics is a joke.
    The Russian space was and is for real!
    In fact! they are in space at this very moment and Yes, they still can walk in space! the Russians. Shame on you popular mechanics! uder water? …

    Reply

  3. xenical without prescription says:

    Xenical (Generic Xenical, Orlistat) blocks some of the fat that you eat from being absorbed by your body. Xenical (Generic Xenical, Orlistat) is used in the management of obesity including weight loss and weight maintenance when used with a reduced-calorie diet. Xenical (Generic Xenical, Orlistat) may also be used for purposes other than those listed in this medication guide.
    http://www.rxwanted.net/generic-xenical.html

    Reply

  4. 911 student says:

    The belief that the Ground Zero devastation can be blamed on “thermite” is no less ludicrous than the belief that it can be blamed on “jet fuel” and “box cutters:
    http://911u.org/Physics/
    Professor Steven Jones is evidently perpetrating a limited-hangout disinfo campaign.

    Reply

  5. pauline says:

    to MP:
    There is more here on the Osama confession tape issue. Make certain you read the entire page before drawing any conclusions.
    http://www.teamliberty.net/id301.html

    Reply

  6. pauline says:

    MP wrote:
    “Is the assumption that this video is faked or that OBL is part of the US plot?”
    I won’t speculate on that other than to say our government has released videos of what are clearly two different people, yet the Bush admin claims all to be Osama. So draw your own conclusions.
    Also, if you google, you’ll find that Osama did make a statement shortly after 9/11 claiming no responsibility. Why wouldn’t he brag about it?
    Also, if you visit the official fbi site and look at their “most wanted” list, Osama is there for Tanzania and Kenya bombings, but no mention at all of 9/11!! (I suppose that’s for the always used “national security reasons”)
    http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm
    Cloaked plotters and deceivers do need stool pigeons, right?

    Reply

  7. MP says:

    Pauline,
    Thanks for posting this. You make interesting claims; I will look into them. As I said to POA, I’ve only gotten a certain way in my research on this. I think a totally new investigation into the event is fully warranted based on all the questions being raised. I’m in total agreement. And no, I don’t believe Saddam was behind 9/11.
    What do folks say about that early tape of OBL, where he appears to be discussing the event as though he had foreknowledge and been its planner. “We didn’t think the towers would come down.”
    Is the assumption that this video is faked or that OBL is part of the US plot?

    Reply

  8. pauline says:

    to MP:
    It’s ok to be a doubter, but how far have you gone to actively look for new evidence? Have you read any of David Ray Griffin’s books on 9/11 or heard him speak? Have you read Michael Collins Piper’s “The High Priests of War”? How about Victor Thorn’s “9/11 Evil”? Have you seen the video “Loose Change” available free on the internet? Otherwise, your thoughts on 9/11, imo, become mere opinion based on. . .what?
    If nothing else, if you don’t think a new totally independent investigation is needed, then you will have to present the 9/11 victim families, our country and the world (and me) the proof that your government, through the 9/11 Commission, revealed the truth about 9/11.
    There is msm footage of a group of NYC firemen who were describing what they saw and heard as they were some of the initial responders to WTC. In one firemen’s words as he visually showed with his hands, he offered, “it sounded like bombs going off. . .boom, boom, boom” Oddly, since shortly after 9/11, the FBI has muzzled — for the often used “national security reasons” — the NY firemen and emt workers from writing or making statements.
    also,
    Financial analyst Ben Fountain told People Magazine that in the weeks before 9/11 there were numerous unannounced and unusual drills where sections of both the twin towers and Building 7 were evacuated for “security reasons”. [www.wingtv.com]
    and don’t forget William Rodriguez, a janitor who worked in WTC and has traveled the country telling his story —
    “Seconds before Flight 11 impacted floors 93 to 99 of the North Tower, janitor William Rodriguez heard and felt the concussion of a massive explosion in the sublevels under his feet. Thought the Twin Towers were anchored to bedrock, the floor beneath his feet vibrated and everything started shaking.
    Then Rodriguez heard “another explosion from way above.”
    Mp, if you do believe the Official 9/11 Commission report on why the Towers fell, you (and they) are defying physics 101.
    The fall of the Towers exhibited all the of features of a controlled demolition. Neither fires nor the Commission’s offered “pancake collapse” could account for the total collpase of the buildings. Whereas WTC-7 was brought down by a classic bottom-up implosion, the North and South Towers msm videos appear as a top-down explosions. Steel columns were ejected horizontally and all of the concrete and non-metallic material was pulverized before it hit the ground.
    1) Sudden onset. Buildings are still, then suddenly and violently the collapse starts. The fires were neither intense, extensive nor long-lasting. Heated steel does not suddenly break, it would have noticeably bent in very asymmetrical shapes. No steel-framed building had ever ever even bent due to fire.
    2) The Towers clearly show a straight down, symmetrical collapse. Again the only way to accomplish this is for the support columns to fail simultaneously. There were 47 steel core supports inside the North and South Towers and the original designer said they were built to withstand hurricanes and large jets. The diffuse, cool-burning jet fuel fires could not have caused this.
    3) The Towers fell at near free-fall speed. By the Law of Momentum Conservation the floors would decelerate at every collision, so had there been a pancake collapse (as the 9/11 Commission said), the Towers wouldn’t have fallen at free-fall speed. Since the Towers exploded from the top down their decent may have depended upon detonation timing.
    4) The Towers all had a total collapse. If a pancake collapse could not account for this, again, prior to, and after 9/11 the only total collapses of these steel-framed buildings could have achieved through controlled demolitions.
    5) All Towers had sliced steel. The only way for the buildings to come straight down was to slice through the vertical support columns, or cores. Again the North and South Towers had 47 cores. Only explosives could have shredded the steel cores — not mere fires. The disappearance of the cores is especially troublesome for the official 9/11 story. That’s why they’ve been so misrepresented in so many instances. The 9/11 Commission went even further by actually denying they even existed, calling the core a “hollow shaft with elevators.”
    6) The end result was pulverization of concrete and non-metallic material. Virtually all of the concrete and non-metallic materials were pulverized into a fine talc-like powder throughout the collapse. The finer the material, the greater the energy required. According to researcher Jeff King, to produce this fine dust requires the breaking of chemical bonds. The physical process of slabs milling or grinding could not account for this pulverization.
    7) The Towers showed horizontal ejections. What besides explosives, could explain the horizontal ejections of the heavy steel columns in all directions at distances of up to 500 ft?
    8) Dust clouds Jim Hoffman calculated the heat required to cause the expansion of the huge dust clouds, which were up to 5 times the volume of the building, to be 10 times the gravitational potential energy of the buildings. This implies another large energy source — not mere fires.
    9) The Towers showed plumes or squibs of smoke. Videos clearly show horizontal ejections of white-grey smoke as seen below the collapsing areas. The location of the plumes correspond to the location of the core columns.
    10) The Towers had molten metal in the basements and thermal hot spots and intense fires for monthss afer 9/11. There were numerous accounts of molten metal buried under the rubble. It takes temperatures of approximately 5200 degrees F to liquify metal. Could the energy from the fallen building have caused this? Physics 101 says “no!”. There would not be enough directed energy as the concrete had been pulverized to powder before it hit the ground and steel beams had been ejected in all directions. Most of the building fell outside of it’s footprint.
    Hey, MP, the NYT says 31% of Americans still think Saddam was personally involved in the 9/11 attacks!! How about you?

    Reply

  9. MP says:

    “…and said that his company was given three weeks advance notice that New York�s Port Authority would take out power in the South Tower from the 48th floor up. The reason: the Port Authority was performing a cabling upgrade to increase the WTC�s computer bandwidth.”
    Thanks, Pauline, for your post. The tower had over 100 floors, 104, I think. So, presumably about 56 floors had their power down, according to this article. Each floor had quite a few offices on it. Many of them, I’m sure, had computer networks.
    If there was a general power down that WE, wouldn’t other offices and many other people have been aware of it besides Forbes?
    I’m not sure why Forbes feels his position would be jeopardized by reporting that the WTC had their power down the WE before, but would others have reported the same as well?
    If, in fact, there were an abnormally large number of FBI agents on the scene too quickly, doesn’t that suggest that the FBI, or at least its top echelons, were in on the plot, too?
    Does it really make sense to suppose that all these people would be keeping quiet about what they know or suspect?
    Lots and lots of cellphone conversations from trapped people were recorded and heard by loved ones and emergency personnel. If there were multiple explosions going off, don’t you think this fact would have been mentioned somewhere along the line…and by people not associated with Fiduciary…and by people who knew they were about to die and people who survived the horrible event and would be only too glad to tell anyone about anything they thought was deeply suspicious about the event?
    I guess what I’m saying is that with SO many people working in offices and in maintenance roles in the WTC…it just seems too ODD that only a select few would mention deeply suspicious facts. The problem, for me, with most of these stories (or the conclusions drawn about them) is that they require many, many people to remain quiet about events they have no reason to remain quiet about–especially those who almost got killed and those who knew they were about to die.
    The fact that there were no denials to this story posted doesn’t mean anything except, maybe, that no one was threatened enough by it, or took it seriously enough, or cared enough about it, to deny it. I don’t really know.
    I’m certainly not mocking you, or anyone else exploring this important issue. Nor am I saying you’re wrong. I’m only saying that THUS FAR I don’t find any of the evidence for government participation that I’ve read to be very convincing. Could I be wrong? Sure. But…

    Reply

  10. pauline says:

    to MP:
    It makes absolutely no sense at all to throw out my “conspiracy theory” to others, because if I told a thousand people, I would get close to a thousand different “conspiracy theories” back. imo, that is total waste of time and energy.
    Let’s concentrate on known “evidence” from the mainstream and alternative presses instead.
    Here’s one story for you. Is this a true story from two years ago? I haven’t found any denials from anyone refuting it.
    *********************
    Pre-9/11 World Trade Center Power-Down
    by Victor Thorn – April 23, 2004
    Did the World Trade Center towers undergo a deliberate �power-down� on the weekend prior to the 9-11 terrorist attacks? According to Scott Forbes, a senior database administrator for Fiduciary Trust, Inc. � a high-net investment bank which was later acquired by Franklin Templeton � this is precisely what took place. Forbes, who was hired by Fiduciary in 1999 and is now stationed at a U.K. branch office, was working on the weekend of September 8-9, 2001, and said that his company was given three weeks advance notice that New York�s Port Authority would take out power in the South Tower from the 48th floor up. The reason: the Port Authority was performing a cabling upgrade to increase the WTC�s computer bandwidth.
    Forbes stated that Fiduciary Trust was one of the WTC�s first occupants after it was erected, and that a �power-down� had never been initiated prior to this occasion. He also stated that his company put forth a huge investment in time and resources to take down their computer systems due to the deliberate power outage. This process, Forbes recalled, began early Saturday morning (September 8th) and continued until mid-Sunday afternoon (September 9th) � approximately 30 hours. As a result of having its electricity cut, the WTC�s security cameras were rendered inoperative, as were its I.D. systems, and elevators to the upper floors.
    Forbes did stress, though, that there was power to the WTC�s lower floors, and that there were plenty of engineers going in-and-out of the WTC who had free access throughout the building due to its security system being knocked out. In an e-mail to journalist John Kaminski, author of The Day America Died (Sisyphus Press) and America�s Autopsy Report (Dandelion Books), Forbes wrote: �Without power there were no security cameras, no security locks on doors, and many, many �engineers� coming in and out of the tower.�
    Forbes didn�t think much of these occurrences at the time, and said that he worked until Monday morning (September 10th) to get all the computer systems back online. Due to his IT-related duties on Saturday & Sunday, Forbes had Tuesday, September 11th off, and thus watched the World Trade Center towers collapse from his apartment. While doing so, he recalled, �I was convinced immediately that something was happening related to the weekend work.�
    In addition, Forbes says there were other peculiarities revolving around this unreported event, including:
    1) Fiduciary employees trapped between the 90-97th floors of the South Tower told family members (via cell-phone calls) that they were hearing �bomb-like explosions� throughout the towers.
    2) Video cameras positioned atop the World Trade Center which were used to feed daily images to local television stations were inexplicably inoperative that morning.
    3) A Fiduciary employee who was on one of the lower floors and escaped immediately after the first (North) tower was struck, reported that he was amazed by the large number of FBI agents that were already on the streets surrounding the WTC complex only minutes after the initial strike.
    4) Last but not least, Ann Tatlock, CEO of Fiduciary Trust and now a board member of Franklin Templeton, had just arrived at a conference hosted by Warren Buffet at the Offutt Air Force Base (home of the U.S. Strategic Command Headquarters in Omaha, Nebraska) when the 9-11 attacks took place. Coincidentally, later that day President George W. Bush flew into this very same base on Air Force One for �security reasons.� Even more chilling are the Offutt AFB ties to the CIA�s MK ULTRA experiments, Project Monarch, the Franklin Cover-Up, and the diabolical practices of Michael Aquino. (Type any of these words into a search engine for more information.)
    In the end, Forbes says that even though these disclosures could jeopardize his current employment, he has stepped forward because, �I have mailed this information to many people, including the 9/11 Commission, but no one seems to be registering these facts.�
    Obviously there are many unanswered questions to this story, and we will keep you updated as more information arrives.

    Reply

  11. Marky says:

    It doesn’t help the cause of the 9/11 sceptics to have Steven Jones are a leading petitioner.
    He has even claimed that there was a fusion weapon used at the WTC.
    Steven Jones was one of the outliers in the cold fusion scandal some years back—he wrote papers on the possibility of cold fusion powering geologic processes.
    When known crackpots are allowed to lead a movement, credibility goes out the window.

    Reply

  12. pauline says:

    MP wrote:
    “Pauline…do you have any info on about how many charges would have to have been laid to bring down a building this size?
    Do you have any info on why none of the building’s maintenance people would have noticed anything odd about the recabling?
    Do you have any information about the companies who were supposedly hired to do the recabling? Was that their legitimate line of business? Or was that their “cover” business? When they showed up, did they bring any cables with them?”
    I will answer your two posts in order.
    Look, I’m a university researcher and I am not privy to any information that any American cannot gather themselves just by doing careful reading.
    To get anyone started on your questions, see the following —
    http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0204-06.htm
    http://www.apfn.net/messageboard/10-16-03/discussion.cgi.17.html
    http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/911security.html
    http://69.28.73.17/thornarticles/powerdown.html
    On the “dancing Israelis”, I will not offer my own “conspiracy theory” because what I personally think and what you or others think does not matter nor does it get to the basis of 9/11. I can only look at the “evidence” out there and sincerely conclude the “official 9/11 Commission” is not accurate on many many points and hence Amercians (and the world) need a new, truly independent investigation. A very good friend of mine was a 9/11 volunteer days after and now suffers from serious lung disorders. Many know the bush admin softened the EPA statements about the quality of air in Manhattan. So, besides the terrible loss of life and destruction on 9/11, I have very personal reasons for wanting this new investigation.
    It is well known out there that some of the dancing Israelis were Mossad connected and/or supported, and the owner of the fake moving company they worked for left the USA in a big hurray right after 9/11 on his way back to Israel.
    So, I’ll ask you, which countries benefited the most by 9/11?
    If you keep reading and researching on your own, you may come to very different answers that you currently hold as true.

    Reply

  13. MP says:

    Re: Dancing Israelis: Is the assumption here that Israelis piloted the planes? Or CIA operatives?
    Do you believe there were Israelis willing to commit suicide for this mission?
    Since Massada, has there ever been a case where Jews committed suicide in this way for this kind of “cause”?

    Reply

  14. MP says:

    Pauline…do you have any info on about how many charges would have to have been laid to bring down a building this size?
    Do you have any info on why none of the building’s maintenance people would have noticed anything odd about the recabling?
    Do you have any information about the companies who were supposedly hired to do the recabling? Was that their legitimate line of business? Or was that their “cover” business? When they showed up, did they bring any cables with them?

    Reply

  15. pauline says:

    If poa is searching and working hard for the “9/11 truth movement” on WTC (rather than the Pentagon 9/11 strike), then certainly he hasn’t overlooked this “strange coincidence” pointed out by Morgan Reynolds at —
    http://www.lewrockwell.com/reynolds/reynolds12.html
    “Controlled demolition would have required unimpeded access to the WTC, access to explosives, avoiding detection, and the expertise to orchestrate the deadly destruction from a nearby secure location. Such access before 9/11 likely depended on complicity by one or more WTC security companies. These companies focus on “access control” and as security specialist Wayne Black says, “When you have a security contract, you know the inner workings of everything.” Stratesec, a now-defunct company that had security contracts at the World Trade Center and Dulles International Airport, should be investigated, among others, because of the strange coincidence that President Bush’s brother, Marvin P. Bush, and his cousin, Wirt D. Walker III, were principals in the company, with Walker acting as CEO from 1999 until January 2002 and Marvin reportedly in New York on 9/11. At least one report claims that a “power down” condition prevailed on September 8-9 (pdf, p. 45) at WTC to complete a “cabling upgrade,” presenting an opportunity to plant explosives with low risk of detection.”
    Gee, the official 9/11 Commission didn’t touch this hot potato at all and I wonder why?! hmm. . .
    For what I believe on 9/11, let’s by start by asking “qui bono?” (hey, poa, do a google on “dancing Israelis” for a hint) The more I study the available “evidence”, I’m just not ready to swallow another “jfk single-bullet theory”.

    Reply

  16. MP says:

    “But because you believe it, it doesn’t make it believable. If we are to find out the truth about 9/11, we will do so with sound argument and believable facts and data.”
    One difficulty here is…what is believable to one person is fantastic to another. This is not just a debating point, but speaks to how seriously one’s arguments will be taken by the public and how much they will have to push to get the “truth” from the government.
    In this case, I think we’ll need a real smoking gun to convince most folks that the government connived in WTC and the Pentagon. Almost anyone is willing to believe that the government was incompetent in any number of criminal ways. But taking the next step and saying they planned or helped plan or otherwise purposely aided the perpetrators of these acts is a very big next step for most people to take.
    We will need much more than “serious questions” or “strange coincidences” or “concealed evidence” or the stories of lone individuals battling to get their story out…to convince most people to give this thesis any traction in the public’s mind.
    At most, most people (who actually don’t have the time to read reams of Web pages on sites) will throw up their hands and say: “We’ll never know the truth.” Isn’t that what most people say about the Kennedy assassination? There’s this theory and that theory…this diagram and that diagram…but no one will ever know for sure. And the folks who do know for sure are now dead and, if alive, certainly won’t talk.
    Think about it this way: If you were an American who was part of the plot to demolish the WTC and attack the Pentagon would you EVER IN A THOUSAND YEARS admit to it? You would perjure yourself 1000 times before you ever coughed up the truth simply because the consequences of telling the truth, for you, would be much, much worse than lying forever.

    Reply

  17. karenk says:

    POA
    You don’t seem to get it. I said enough of these crazy conspiracy theories(not theorists) because I thought that poster johnny was saying that OBL and al Qaeda didn’t plan and carry out 9/11. Since they clearly did, to suggest otherwise I believe is crazy. As far as everything else, there are questions.

    Reply

  18. Pissed Off American says:

    “btw, poa, what hard facts on Pentagon 9/11 do you, as part of the truth movement, use?”
    I leave the Pentagon part of 9/11 alone. There are many inexplicable elements to the Pentagon crime, not the least of which I have already described. But one does not need to advance fantastic scenarios to question the official accounting of 9/11. The minute you start claiming that the plane did not impact the Pentagon, someone else will chime in with some bullshit about it being a missile surrounded by a holographic image, or start nattering on about “pods” on the wings of the jets that hit the WTC. Is it questionable that these 19 hi-jackers could have pulled this off, including seemingly admirable feats of aerobatics?? Absolutely. Particularly when you consider that we know, irrefutably, that some of the hi-jackers were misindentified. So we really have no idea who was at the controls of these aircraft. But again, I must reiterate….when we get into the realm of holographic images concealing missile hits, or pods on wings, we are getting into the realm of the Twilight Zone, and it is of no service to the search for the truth. Sometimes, the simplest clues are the most graphic. Atta’s passport is a good example, as is the Pakistani ISI’s role in financing Atta, and Goss and Graham’s “coincidental” meeting with Mahmud Ahmmed, the ISI general that is known to have funded Atta.
    Believe what you will. But because you believe it, it doesn’t make it believable. If we are to find out the truth about 9/11, we will do so with sound argument and believable facts and data. Even if the truth is fantastic, we will not find the truth by presenting fantastic scenarios. Work with the obvious, relentlessly and loudly, and the whole story will collapse.

    Reply

  19. pauline says:

    poa —
    I’ve got swamp in a Florida to sell anyone that believes the “official” 9/11 Commission story that a 19-year-old Arab flew Flight 77 at 500mph a few feet off the ground and then into the Pentagon.
    the news on Pentagon 9/11 even included this account that fateful morning —
    “9:35. The hijacker-pilots were then forced to execute a difficult high-speed descending turn. Radar shows Flight 77 did a downward spiral, turning almost a complete circle and dropping the last 7,000 feet in two-and-a-half minutes. The steep turn was so smooth, the sources say, it’s clear there was no fight for control going on. And the complex maneuver suggests the hijacker(s) had better flying skills than many investigators first believed.” [CBS news]
    btw, poa, what hard facts on Pentagon 9/11 do you, as part of the truth movement, use? I am not theorizing on any particuliar story other than the official 9/11 Commission story is so full of holes and the known “facts” gathered from many, many media sources (unless untrue) simply don’t add up.

    Reply

  20. Pissed Off American says:

    Gee, MP. one minute you say you researched using links I didn’t provide, the next moment you are claiming you did a google. Well, hell, if I can’t remember if its fish or fowl, I guess I can’t fault you for living in a blackout.

    Reply

  21. pauline says:

    poa — and who was Hani Hanjour?
    “…after instructors at Pan Am International Flight Academy in Phoenix found Hanjour’s piloting skills so shoddy and his grasp of English so inadequate they questioned whether his pilot’s license was genuine.” [new york times]
    “…the instructor staff never suspected that Hanjour was a hijacker but feared that he posed safety hazard if he flew a commercial airliner.” [new york times]
    “Staff members characterized Mr. Hanjour as polite, meek and very quiet. But most of all, the former employee said, they considered him a very bad pilot. “I’m still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon,” the former employee said. “He could not fly at all.” [new york times – reprinted]

    Reply

  22. MP says:

    “”…..At this point, based on what I’ve read–including the pieces I’ve read on Rodriguez and Edmonds thanks to your links…..”
    Thats quite a trick, MP, seeing as how I did not provide you with any links.”
    You know, you’re right about that; you refused to give me links. So I went and Googled Rodriguez and Edmonds and started reading on my own. So far, what I’ve read does raise questions, but the jury is IMO still way, way out.
    Get some sleep before you start adding “Pauline” to my list of troll pseudonyms.

    Reply

  23. pauline says:

    my dear poa —
    you wrote:
    “Oh bullshit. This issue of whether or not a plane hit the Pentagon is a Red Heron, expressly designed to discredit the 9/11 truth movement as being comprised of nut jobs and wackos. There are plenty of unanswered questions, and smoking guns, that cry out for explanation, without floating this fantastic crap such as we see above.”
    hmm, maybe you didn’t read enough from the pentagonresearch site when the following was offered — especially reason “b”:
    ***************
    “To me this means:
    a) They do not have video of an AA 757-200 in the area.
    b) They do have video and they are waiting for the “right” time to release it.
    c) What they have video of is not a AA 757-200.
    If “A” is true, whether or not a 757 was in the area or not, their case is damaged.
    If “B” is true, then they have a plan to discredit the 9/11 Truth Movement by releasing footage of an aircraft at a time fortuitous for them. After the blurry indistinguishable images they recently released soak in for a while, if they show footage of an aircraft in the general area later, people will automatically couple that in their minds with the recent video and say ‘see’.
    If “C” is true then I’m guessing it will never see the light of day.”
    ***************
    poa, you are going to have to slow down your anger momentarily and tell me how this does damage the searth for truth when one of the three choices offered include your concerns? Is not the writer offering something logical here on the “plane” or “no plane” issue?
    I am amazed and disturbed that nobody found 757 wing sections, tail sections, or engine parts that belong to a 757. The one engine part found, I am told, was way too small to be part of a 757 engine. No seats, no luggage, no human remains found. Even the dogs couldn’t sniff out any human remains. Yet some people conclude a 757 absolutely did hit the Pentagon!
    Oh, and how about the “official” fed story changing from “the plane completely disintegrated” to “we have locked the plane’s remaining pieces in a secure hanger”. And don’t forget the original “official” fed story that a Saudi commercial pilot flew Flight 77, and then, well, a 19-year-old is the Flight 77 terrorist pilot (whose instructors said couldn’t fly a single engine Cessna), and now all of a sudden he can make the 270 degree turn with a 757 and fly it 500 mph a few feet off the ground into a part of the Pentagon that was least “damaging”?!
    what of this don’t you believe to be true??
    *********
    “The speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that it was a military plane,” said O’Brien [ABC news]
    “But just as the plane seemed to be on a suicide mission into the White House, the unidentified pilot executed a pivot so tight that it reminded observers of a fighter jet maneuver.” [washington post]
    **********
    Why didn’t the feds show even Bill O’Reilly, Wolf Blitzer, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh the “secret hanger” then or now?
    Oh, and don’t forget, a lawsuit using FOIA revealed a passenger list that had no Arab names on Flight 77.
    Any more of this kind of “proof”, imo, starts to look like that JFK single bullet theory!
    I am amazed that you, poa, think a 757 could penetrate the various sections of the Pentagon, leaving circles through those thick Pentagon walls in an approximate 14 foot diameter that was much smaller than the diameter of a 757.
    I am amazed that there was a wide discrepancy to what “eye witnesses” saw as far as the size and type of plane. Several people reported seeing an aircraft that was much smaller than a 757. Some said it whined like a missile. How could this be? Yes, eye witnesses can certainly give different stories of what they saw, but wouldn’t a large 757 so close to the ground make so much noise it would almost be deafening? btw, the only person I saw quoted as saying he definitely saw and “heard” a 757 was Bobby Eberle, who claimed he just happened to be driving by on the interstate. Mr. Eberle also just happens to be the owner of gopusa.com — and who gave us fake reporter, Jeff Gannon.
    Please lay out your several specific unanswered questions as I want to see how they differ from the three choices (a,b,or c) that the pentagon research site has listed.
    It is time for more specifics and discussion rather than more verbal anger.

    Reply

  24. Pissed Off American says:

    Well, ET…..
    Heron, Herring,….hell, I have a hard enough time trying to remember if I am supposed to count armadillos or sheep when I’m trying to sleep, so whats a Heron or two gonna harm?

    Reply

  25. Pissed Off American says:

    “…..At this point, based on what I’ve read–including the pieces I’ve read on Rodriguez and Edmonds thanks to your links…..”
    Thats quite a trick, MP, seeing as how I did not provide you with any links.
    Tell ya what, I think alec wants to meet you at Disneyland. He’ll be waiting for you at the Jungle Ride. Have an E-Ticket ready.

    Reply

  26. elementary teacher says:

    Logicians, for details on the Red Herring Fallacy (aka Ignoratio Elenchi), kindly see:
    http://www.fallacyfiles.org/redherrf.html

    Reply

  27. Pissed Off American says:

    “Anyone offering this kind of worthless fantasy is doing damage to the search for truth. Don’t be sucked in by such ridiculous and transparently deflective tactics.”
    I was referring to Pauline’s post, I should have made that clear.
    The only thing about the Pentagon incident that qualifies as a “conspiracy theory” is the fact that the very entities that are supposed to protect America were so fucking inept that a plane could actually hit the God damned place after flying around for an hour or so. It defies the imagination that such a thing could happen and no heads rolled. There should have been a slew of firings, but NO ONE has been held accountable. Good lord, has anyone considered the fact that if these were enemy bombers dropping nukes they would have taken out Washington and New York before that buffoon Bush finished the first chapter of “My Pet Goat”???

    Reply

  28. Pissed Off American says:

    Oh bullshit. This issue of whether or not a plane hit the Pentagon is a Red Heron, expressly designed to discredit the 9/11 truth movement as being comprised of nut jobs and wackos. There are plenty of unanswered questions, and smoking guns, that cry out for explanation, without floating this fantastic crap such as we see above. Anyone offering this kind of worthless fantasy is doing damage to the search for truth. Don’t be sucked in by such ridiculous and transparently deflective tactics.

    Reply

  29. elementary teacher says:

    Kill the Messenger: Documentary on Sibel Edmonds
    . Directed by French filmmakers Verboud and Viallet, the film explores the abuses behind the State Secrets Privilege as invoked in FBI Whistleblower Sibel Edmonds’ case
    . highlights the travails and persecution of US national security whistleblowers
    . filmmakers spent nearly two years interviewing witnesses and researching the invocation and implementation of the state secrets privilege in Edmonds’ case
    . Based on documented findings and interviews with experts such as David Albright, Philip Giraldi, John Cole, Joseph Trento, Glenn Fine, David Rose, and others familiar with Edmonds’ case, the film presents a terrifying picture of Turkish networks’ activities in global nuclear black-market, narcotics and illegal arms trafficking activities in the United States, and examines the extraordinary efforts of officials within the US Government to insure that the secrecy surrounding Edmonds’ case be maintained at any cost – from Edmonds’ termination from the FBI, to invoking the State Secrets Privilege, to gagging the US Congress.
    . documents the formation of the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition and the collective struggle of its members to bring legislative and media attention to retaliation by national security agencies against whistleblowers, and the resulting danger such suppression of the truth causes the United States.
    . filmmakers interviewed many high-profile national security whistleblowers, including Daniel Ellsberg, Coleen Rowley (FBI), Russell Tice (NSA), Bogdan Dzakovic (DHS), John Vincent (FBI), Steve Elson (FAA), John M. Cole (FBI), and Matthew Fogg, among others.
    . Having lived under tyranny in Iran and elsewhere, Edmonds knows what it looks like. In her case, and in many other recent cases, tyranny comes in the form of the state secrets privilege, a foolproof mechanism of the federal government to hide executive branch corruption, incompetence, and illegal activity. This is a practice more at home with Czars and nabobs, and should have no place in the United States. But Edmonds gave the government something it never expected – a no holds barred battle.
    “Making a film on a woman who is gagged by the Bush administration, one of the most secretive in U.S history, was almost a civic duty. We hope this film will be a wake up call for all of us;” stated Mathieu Verboud, the co-director of “Kill the Messenger.”
    Trailer, interview with the directors, background information:
    http://justacitizen.com/KillTheMessenger.html

    Reply

  30. pauline says:

    On the Pentagon strike, I’ve found this site’s original info to still be worth reviewing
    http://www.pentagonresearch.com/video.html
    VIDEO EVIDENCE
    The purpose of this page is to demonstrate the existence of video and the likelihood that somewhere in the 85 videos the FBI admits to having, there should be an image of a 757-200. One of the greatest mysteries of the Pentagon incident is that in a town full of media that was already aware of the attacks in New York, there is not one single still photo or video of an AA 757 anywhere near the Pentagon that morning. This void of information is what has spurred the variety of theories to account for the damage at the Pentagon.
    The U.S Government originally claimed to have no video. The Pentagon even told broadcast news reporters that its security cameras did not capture the crash. Then five frames were leaked which you can read about on the DoD Video page 1. They most recently released another video (which does not show a 757 clearly) that you can read about on DoD Video page 2. If, in fact, they have clear video of a 757-200 hitting the Pentagon they have refused to release it. I personally believe they have purposefully contributed to the confusion surrounding the Pentagon attack. To allow this and not put the stories to rest may speak of an ulterior motive and most certainly is thoughtless in regards to the families and the victims.
    Due to the great work of fellow 9/11 researcher Scott Bingham you can actually view the Freedom of Information Request Act documents proving the existence of confiscated video. The FBI attempted to deny having them and after an appeal acknowledged having them. They originally refused to release them because it might, ‘interfere with enforcement proceedings’. All documents in the sidebar are from the ongoing case. To visit the original site for more details you can go to Flight 77 Info .
    “Just before impact, the plane clipped off two VDOT light poles on Washington Boulevard, a football field or two away from the Pentagon. In the same area, the blast from the plane’s impact damaged the lenses of one of VDOT’s traffic monitoring cameras and knocked the camera sideways” (Source). To see the significance of this view and the VDOT’s response to my inquiry, click on the sidebar VDOT Traffic Camera View.
    Interview with Jamie McIntyre CNN Pentagon Correspondent:
    MCINTYRE (on camera): ��”Sources tell CNN that the FBI on September 11th confiscated a nearby hotel�s security camera videotape, which also captured the attack. So far the Justice Department has refused to release that videotape. Aaron.”
    BROWN: “Why? Do we have any idea why they won�t release it?”
    MCINTYRE: “Well, the claim � we have filed a freedom of information request for it. They claim that it might provide some intelligence to somebody else who might want to do harm to the United States. But officials I talked to here at the Pentagon say they don�t see any national security or criminal value to that tape. The FBI tends to hold on to things. But the government may eventually release that tape, and if they do, we�ll bring it to you.�
    (CNN Newsnight Aaron Brown March 7, 2002 Thursday Transcript #030700CN.V84)
    �A security camera atop a hotel close to the Pentagon may have captured dramatic footage of the hijacked Boeing 757 airliner as it slammed into the western wall of the Pentagon. Hotel employees sat watching the film in shock and horror several times before the FBI confiscated the video as part of its investigation. It may be the only video available of the attack. The Pentagon has told broadcast news reporters that its security cameras did not capture the crash. The attack occurred close to the Pentagon�s heliport, an area that normally would be under 24-hour security surveillance, including video monitoring.� (Source)
    Local copy – original removed.
    Now the FBI says, “I also conducted a search of the FBI’s Electronic Case File System, Investigative Case Mangement System, and other evidence databases for any videotapes in the possession of the FBI from the Sheraton National Hotel in Arlington, Virginia. I did not locate any such video tape.” (Maguire Documents)
    To see how important the view from this missing tape may have been, see the sidebar Sheraton View. Jamie McIntyre heard of the hotel tape and Pentagon reporters Bill Gertz and Rowan Scarborough even documented that the employees had viewed the tape. Where did it go?
    From my conversations with hotel managers in the vicinity I was told that on the 12th and 13th the FBI “canvassed” the entire area confiscating tapes. There are many buildings with vantage points there and that is where these 85 tapes originated from. I received lots of statements like, ” we’re not at liberty to discuss that” and people generally seemed nervous talking about it at all. In the following quote we will see that the FBI was reported to have been at the Citgo within minutes. This may be because of its proximity to the Pentagon and the fact that it is a government concession.
    �Velasquez says the gas station�s security cameras are close enough to the Pentagon to have recorded the moment of impact. ‘I�ve never seen what the pictures looked like,’ he said. ‘The FBI was here within minutes and took the film.’� National Geographic News
    (Local copy)
    Now the FBI says, “Among the eighty-five (85) videotapes described in paragraph 11, above, I located one videotape taken from closed circuit television at the Citgo Gas Station in Arlington, Virginia. Because of its generally poor quality, the tape was taken to the FBI’s Audio-Video Image Analysis Unit (AVIAU)…..to determine that the videotape did not show the impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001.” (Maguire Documents)
    Did you catch the word game they are playing there? The FOIA was originally written with the language to provide video of the impact. It did not request footage of a 757 flight path. This means that the other 85 videos may have footage of a 757 but not of the impact. If you look at the Citgo View sidebar you will see why that video in particular did not capture the impact but may have flight path footage if it exists. I have talked to somebody that was an employee there and that information is also on the sidebar.
    In the Maguire Documents we became aware of video we had not heard of before. “I did locate one videotape taken from a closed circuit television at a Doubletree Hotel in Arlington, Virginia. I determined, however, that the videotape did not show the impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001.” There’s a theme developing here. This view from the Doubletree would not have been able to physically see the impact but it could have a direct shot of an aircraft approaching the hotel. The side bar Doubletree Inn View shows the orientation of the building and its view.
    The rest of the views in the sidebar are photos from buildings in the area. It is not known if any of those locations had video confiscated. It is just to show the potential of video in the area that the FBI “canvassed”. The details of the CCTV camera at the Pentagon can be located on the Dod Video pages.
    The FBI’s summary goes like this, “…..fifty-six (56) of these videotapes did not show either the Pentagon building, the Pentagon crash site, or the impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon…..I personally reviewed the remaining twenty-nine (29) videotapes. I determined that sixteen (16) of these video tapes did not show the Pentagon crash site and did not show the impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon…..Out of the remaining thirteen (13) videotapes, which did show the Pentagon crash site, twelve (12) videotapes only showed the Pentagon after the impact of Flight 77. I determined that only one videotape showed the impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001.” (Maguire Documents)
    Notice there is not one single mention of an aircraft (or absence of) in any of the video tapes. They also definitively claim that only one new tape shows the impact. That is the second angle from the guard shack I presume which they released. Then in the 56 videos that “did not show either the Pentagon building [or] the Pentagon crash site….” you could get away with a video on the facade of the Pentagon if it didn’t show the building or looked out beyond the actual crash site the way it is worded. The fact is they are playing word games and manipulating the information they have which is a disgrace to the American Justice System.
    To me this means:
    a) They do not have video of an AA 757-200 in the area.
    b) They do have video and they are waiting for the “right” time to release it.
    c) What they have video of is not a AA 757-200.
    If “A” is true, whether or not a 757 was in the area or not, their case is damaged.
    If “B” is true, then they have a plan to discredit the 9/11 Truth Movement by releasing footage of an aircraft at a time fortuitous for them. After the blurry indistinguishable images they recently released soak in for a while, if they show footage of an aircraft in the general area later, people will automatically couple that in their minds with the recent video and say ‘see’. If they do present footage of an aircraft in the air that is not certainly on a suicide flight path into the Pentagon then the time/date stamp will be the only way to directly associate it with the Pentagon incident. They have proven so far that they don’t release accurate or official time/date stamps with their video. In other words, they have options to manipulate the masses through the media.
    If “C” is true then I’m guessing it will never see the light of day.

    Reply

  31. MP says:

    “No, thats not what I said. I simply pointed out that you have made some strong statements about 9/11, and those of us that doubt the official version of what happened. ”
    Actually, for what it’s worth, I haven’t done this at all. I do believe that all arguments should be held up to scrutiny on their merits, including yours. Scrutiny is progressive and takes place over time: I believe X now, but over time, as I learn more, I may change my mind based on what I see as the evidence and how credible I think it is.
    (In the case of the WTC, this is a little tougher than usual because there are scientific and engineering issues that come into play–and I’m an expert in neither.)
    I haven’t said anything about those who doubt the official story, but I do believe the doubters have to prove their case, to the degree that that’s possible. They don’t get a free pass just because they (and I) oppose the Bush Administration and think it’s corrupt. Nor does the Bush Administration get a free pass.
    At this point, based on what I’ve read–including the pieces I’ve read on Rodriguez and Edmonds thanks to your links–I still think the jury is out.

    Reply

  32. Pissed Off American says:

    Maybe you still think I’m a troll or Zeke/Brian/Alec/Cela…LOL.
    Posted by MP
    You forgot David.

    Reply

  33. Pissed Off American says:

    ……and all you can say is, “Sorry, the fact that you don’t already know this stuff disqualifies you from posting.”
    No, thats not what I said. I simply pointed out that you have made some strong statements about 9/11, and those of us that doubt the official version of what happened. Yet your stements here on this thread imply that you know nothing, or very little, about Sibel Edmonds and her ongoing travails, and past testimonies. For this not so humble observor, it just implies to me, on this issue, that you are woefully uninformed. I couldn’t care less whether you post to the issue or not, but don’t expect me to nod my head at the musings of someone that doesn’t know WTF they are talking about, yet feels they have the body of knowledge to intelligently rebut, or even discern, “cobnspiracy theories”.
    And as far as the “conversation about the electoral process” goes, the same applies. You were perfectly willing to jack your jaws about the machines and the process, yet were seemingly completely unaware of Bev Harris’ efforts at blackboxvoting, and the instances of fraud, malfeasance, and security loopholes she had tied to Diebold. (To say nothing about the fact that you claim to have a wife activelly involved in monitoring the process, yet you STILL seemingly knew nothing about Harris. Theres something wrong with that picture, MP.)
    Look, MP, you want to natter ceaselessly about issues you have not bothered to inform yourself about, thats your privelege. I couldn’t care less. But do not expect me to engage in debates about this stuff, with you, without pulling your covers and yankin’ your chain.
    And as far the sarcastic tone of your post??? Hey, guy, YOU are the one blathering on about issues you know nothing about, so don’t be decrying my ability and willingness to call a spade a spade.

    Reply

  34. MP says:

    “MP. I fear I must once again point out that you seem to cast forward with strong opinions that are based on little more than air.”
    What a strange thing to say. All of us are to greater and lesser degrees well and ill-informed on any number of issues.
    Here I say thank you for bringing X, Y, and Z to my attention, I’ll look it into further…and all you can say is, “Sorry, the fact that you don’t already know this stuff disqualifies you from posting.”
    Is this actually how you plan to unseat Bush and friends? That’s some strange thinking, pard’ner.
    Same thing goes for our conversation our the electoral process. Bizarre is the only word for it.
    Maybe you still think I’m a troll or Zeke/Brian/Alec/Cela…LOL.

    Reply

  35. Pissed Off American says:

    “I will look into Edmonds and Rodriguez.”
    MP. I fear I must once again point out that you seem to cast forward with strong opinions that are based on little more than air. If you are not aware of Edmonds history in the 9/11 saga, than you should consider yourself unqualified to comment on “conspiracy theories” as they apply to 9/11. Obviously, you haven’t even bothered to aprise yourself of the more glaring, and widely known, holes in the “official story”. Herexperiences pre-9/11, her testimony before the 9/11 commission, the subsequent classification of her testimony, are all part and parcel of the ongoing efforts some are lodging to pry the truth out of these bastards in the upper tiers of the Bush Administration.
    I’d give you links, but as you proved with the ones I provided on the corrupted electoral process, it would just be a waste of my time.

    Reply

  36. elementary teacher says:

    The Chimp-In-Chief Tries to Downsize Geneva Conventions
    According to Amnesty:
    Bush is attempting to undo the leadership shown by our past presidents. After World War II, the US was instrumental in developing the Geneva Conventions to ensure that any person in detention is treated with dignity…
    In spite of the Supreme Court decision, growing criticism from allied governments, and dissent from leaders of his own party including Colin Powell, Bush is pushing Congress to redefine the Geneva Conventions.
    “After continuing to insist that no laws were broken in detainee treatment, why does the President now feel the need to narrow the scope of international treaties that have withstood the test of time? Amnesty International believes that any attempt to undercut the Conventions will set a worrying precedent that will invite countries all over the world to follow suit. A global redefinition of the Geneva Conventions will undermine fundamental protections that have served soldiers and civilians in armed conflict for over 50 years.”
    http://tinyurl.com/gwsxr

    Reply

  37. Love says:

    The Koran expressly Commands World Jihad and World Domination for Islam. Here are the verses:
    http://www.transworldnews.com/NewsStory.aspx?storyid=9761&ret=news.aspx&cat=

    Reply

  38. janinsanfran says:

    It might be news here that municipal, etc., ordinances about “curbing your dog” were the brain child of the assasinated gay political civil rights leader, Harvey Milk. In honor of his birthday, I put up a colllection of such signs here:
    http://happening-here.blogspot.com/2006/05/happy-birthday-harveycurb-that-dog.html
    Steve — yours is a gem in category.
    And I agree with many upthread — Bush doesn’t let a mere legal problem get rid of a loyal functionary like Bolton. What’ll he do next?

    Reply

  39. liz says:

    if a picture is worth a thousands words…. wow. I bet they would have crossed arms if they tried to sit together today…. of course, I think Colin Powell would flat out refuse like NORMAL Americans …. normal people, alot of us, think Bush is bizarre right now. I hear it at the grocery, church, all meetings. If he could hear it maybe he would understand…. people lost trust in him and his government a long time ago. If R’s win elections it is courtesy of DIEBOLD all around. There is just no excuse to gut America and act as if you don’t get it.

    Reply

  40. MP says:

    “Gee, what a suprise you would counter my post with an example of EXACTLY what I am talking about, MP. Yeah, the Popular Mechanics article was compiled by Michael Chertoff’s nephew. Doesn’t that strike you as just a bit opportune? It is one of the classic examples of throwing us a bunch of fantastic bullshit, and claiming that it is adressing the REAL QUESTIONS. The Popular Mechanics piece is joke, MP. Nary a mention of Sybil Edmonds. No mention of William Rodriquez.”
    Yes, it does. I wasn’t aware of the Chertoff connection. Thanks for letting me know. I will look into Edmonds and Rodriguez. Thanks. Not sure I agree with you on the volcano piece; nor are we (at least I’m not) in a position to evaluate the validity of the science involved. Lots of true stuff seems incredible to the layman.

    Reply

  41. .... says:

    i like that sign too. a little bit of humour goes a long ways towards expanding ones consciousness.
    deep cove is a pretty groovy place… what were you doing over their, or did a friend send the pic?

    Reply

  42. elementary teacher says:

    The Chimpinator’s Big Push in Congress Signals Fear & Weakness
    According to Lindorff:
    …The list of this president’s crimes against the Constitution, the Republic and the People of the United States is long and ugly, and the truth is that the two areas where he is the most vulnerable to impeachment are precisely the two that he is working so hard now to make go away: the warrant-less NSA spying program and the abuse of the detainees at Guantanamo and elsewhere …
    http://tinyurl.com/zq4j4

    Reply

  43. Pissed Off American says:

    “As to the second category, a lot of work has been done by independent experts to answer the questions or dispel them. Two I’m aware of are Popular Mechanics which consulted a board of about 40 experts in a wide range of relevant fields (engineering, military, demolition) and they concluded that most of the alternative explanations for the attack are baseless.”
    Gee, what a suprise you would counter my post with an example of EXACTLY what I am talking about, MP. Yeah, the Popular Mechanics article was compiled by Michael Chertoff’s nephew. Doesn’t that strike you as just a bit opportune? It is one of the classic examples of throwing us a bunch of fantastic bullshit, and claiming that it is adressing the REAL QUESTIONS. The Popular Mechanics piece is joke, MP. Nary a mention of Sybil Edmonds. No mention of William Rodriquez.
    Tell me, MP, how do you debunk the arguments of those that distrust the official version of 9/11 without mentioning Sibel Edmonds?
    BTW, I saw that volcano crap on the History Channel, and it was about the most ridiculous comedy I have seen in a long time. If you think that was “science” than you must have skipped junior high school. Only an idiot could have swallowed that farcical piece of garbage. And who the fuck cares about folded jeans in a ladder truck when you have Willie Rodriquez’ story to ponder? Or the experiences of Edmonds???
    Stop helping them throw crap at us, MP, and start addressing the true issues behind 9/11. Do you REALLY think you are dealing with nation of full idiots?

    Reply

  44. MP says:

    “This is why I reacted so strongly against Karenk’s labeling. This administration is casting ridiculous and fantastic fantasies as being the ACTUAL questions in regards to the occurrences on 9/11.”
    Aren’t there two broad categories of questions? One category has to do with the government’s incompetence before, during, after the event. The second category has to do with who the perpetrators of the attack were and how they carried it out. That is, was the government complicit in carrying out the attack? Were the WTC buildings brought down by demolition charges? And similar kinds of charges.
    As to the second category, a lot of work has been done by independent experts to answer the questions or dispel them. Two I’m aware of are Popular Mechanics which consulted a board of about 40 experts in a wide range of relevant fields (engineering, military, demolition) and they concluded that most of the alternative explanations for the attack are baseless.
    Skeptic Magazine also looked at these hypotheses and concluded the same thing, as far as I know.
    Of course, these folks may be wrong. I don’t have the technical expertise to be able to judge fully for myself. Nor have I been able to examine the evidence first hand. Most people are in my position. Nevertheless, some questions persist because the questioners refuse to accept the answers given–not by the government, but by independent investigators. If they refuse to accept the answers, then the questions will persist, but that doesn’t mean they are legitimate. They persist because people keep putting them forward long after they’ve been answered.
    Since the folks who perpetrated the crime aren’t likely to come forward–unless you accept OBL’s statements as “coming forward”–then I don’t see how these questions can be put to bed. All sorts of weird things happen in events like this, e.g., the neatly folded jeans that ended up on the front seat of Ladder Company 4’s truck. They weren’t stolen, as some alleged, but rather the blast put them there. Yet some people continue to ask, “How is that possible?” It took a scientist working on volcanic explosions to show how it could happen and exonerate the dead firefighters.

    Reply

  45. Elizabeth says:

    In Minnesota it would clearly read “woof-da”, eh?

    Reply

  46. elementary teacher says:

    The Chimperor’s Secret Clinks Condemned
    The European Union condemned on Friday the detention of terrorism suspects by the US in secret overseas prisons, whose existence U.S. President George Bush first acknowledged last week.
    “The existence of secret detention facilities where detained persons are kept in a legal vacuum is not in conformity with international humanitarian law and international criminal law,” Finnish Foreign minister Erkki Tuomioja told a news conference …
    “We reiterate that in combating terrorism, human rights and humanitarian standards have to be maintained,” said Tuomioja, whose country holds the EU’s rotating presidency.
    Bush publicly acknowledged the CIA held high-level terrorism suspects, including alleged September 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, in secret overseas locations …
    He strongly defended the secret detention and questioning of terrorism suspects and said the CIA treated them humanely and did not torture…
    “Secret prisons are illegal, immoral, and counter-productive in any strategy to win hearts and minds,” EU counter-terrorism coordinator Gijs de Vries said…
    http://tinyurl.com/q5nls

    Reply

  47. Carroll says:

    Laura Rosen mentioned this the other day and now billmon has this to say…..I wish I thought this entire adm would end up in court…they should and they would if we had any politicans who gave a damn about anything but their own careers…
    “And why are the Rovian clone clowns on Capitol Hill trying to amend the War Crimes Act? And why are CIA operatives suddenly taking out “torture insurance” (including the accidental death or dismemberment riders)?
    The answers are pretty obvious: They’re all exposed. They’re great big flabby asses are hanging out in the legal breeze, and they know it. They actually scared it could come to this”

    Reply

  48. Carroll says:

    De furer in the Rose Garden:
    “It is unacceptable for Americans to think that way…”
    I confess I pay so little attention to the little fop that I don’t know what he was referring to but I guess it means don’t think period.
    And that other Bush thing…”Americans “MUST”, blah,blah,”. “MUST”…?
    And what is with the idiot Pope and his Islam slam?…as if we needed more incitement for the loony religious. Gawd!
    Everytime you think you have one loony like Bolton in a box, the others get worse and another one pops up.

    Reply

  49. Pissed Off American says:

    The following is from the “Whatreallyhappened” website. Rivero gets it, and always has. He recognizes the strategies being used to quiet those that are questioning the official accounting of what occurred on 9/11. This is why I reacted so strongly against Karenk’s labeling. This administration is casting ridiculous and fantastic fantasies as being the ACTUAL questions in regards to the occurrences on 9/11. In so doing they seek to conceal and marginalize the very real questions that remain unanswered, implying a overnmental cover-up of unprecedented proportions. And this administration is worried about these questions being asked. That much s obvious. Why did they collaborate on this fantasy that Disney/ABC just foisted upon us? Why was Scholastic preparing to flood our high schools with lies and propaganda, seeking to change the KNOWN history of the period leading up to 9/11???
    Please do not be fooled by these fantastic fantasies that the Bush Administration would have you believe fuel the 9/11 truth movement. There are very real questions that MUST be answered as to the circumstances surrounding 9/11, and the cry for answers is becoming louder and more mainstream as everyday passes. Do not allow the likes of Fox News or Tony Snow to diminish or marginilize the importance of finding the truth about what occurred on 9/11, and the truth about who was behind it.
    http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/
    Brasscheck still pushing “no plane” nonsense
    Posted Sep 16, 2006 07:28 AM PST
    Category: 911
    Brasscheck TV is making all kinds of wounded sounds about my comment from yesterday regarding this photo. But facts are facts.
    In the article I linked to yesterday, the photo is headlined as “A picture of the Pentagon you’ve never seen before”. Clearly, that is not true since the photo in question has been at my website for many months.
    Secondly, the photo Brasscheck TV offers has been severely cropped from the original and excludes a very obvious pile of aircraft debris, including seats and luggage, that has been pushed off to the left side.
    As there is no smoke or smouldering, and as there has been enough time for some scaffolding to be inserted into the left edge of the hole to prevent further collapse, this photo was taken some time after the actual impact, after efforts to clear the debris and start repairs had already begun. So, it makes sense that actual debris from the impact point would have started to have been cleared away.
    This “no plane” nonsense is a government disinfo plant. Every media attack on those who doubt the official 9-11 story inevitably uses this hoax to make the 9-11 truth movement look silly.
    The claim that there was no plane at the Pentagon makes no sense. If the 9-11 perps have to get rid of the plane and passengers anyway, why not crash them into the Pentagon? Why add complexity to an already complex issue to save the plane and passengers when you have to get rid of them afterwards anyway?
    Why would the 9-11 perps even bother with such a hoax to substitute some other aircraft for the passenger jet, then have to destroy the passenger jet and the passengers somewhere else, THEN get rid of that wreckage so it would never be found?
    Finally, hundreds of witnesses saw the passenger jet flying towards the Pentagon. Not one person reported seeing it flying away, and with the WTC already destroyed everyone was very sensitive to nearby aircraft. People were looking very carefully at anything with wings. Hundreds saw the passenger jet head towards the Pentagon. None saw it fly away. What do the “Pod people” imagine, that Mr. Spock beamed the passenger jet up to the Enterprise at the last second?
    The “no plane” theory does not make any sense. It never has. It exists solely to give the mainstream media an easy-to-use handle to ridicule those who doubt the official story.

    Reply

  50. Pissed Off American says:

    I have no doubt that Powell possesses information that could sink the Bush/Cheney ship. It will be interesting to see if Powell finally takes the muzzle off when Bush is no longer CIC. What a different world we might live in today if people like Powell and Wilkerson would have located thier gonads when it would have made a difference.
    I wonder, does Powell resent the fact that his tenure with these criminals destroyed his chances for a political career? He had great promise, but history will remember him as the man that carried his President’s lies to the UN, and as a man that helped frame the greatest foreign policy blunder in the history of our nation.

    Reply

  51. LisainVan says:

    Nah, the dogs are just excited to be at Deep Cove, the southernmost fjord in the Northern Hemisphere. A place so beautiful you can forget about the UN and world affairs pretty easily.

    Reply

  52. John Neff says:

    In Quebec it would be in French only. I don’t recall what bark and woof are in French but I think Grrrrr is probably the same.
    I have always wanted to visit Vancouver now I have another reason.

    Reply

  53. steve duncan says:

    I doubt Bolton is going anywhere. Whether it means following the law or breaking it Bush will keep him right where he is. Bush will not be dictated to, he is above the law, and he does what he damn well pleases.

    Reply

  54. tucker's bow tie says:

    HEY!!!! Where’s the French version ?!?
    This being Canada and all..hm, maybe the good people in BC put their French on the flipside 😉

    Reply

  55. Doggie Canuck says:

    Where is the Eah ? in that translation ?
    Woof !

    Reply

  56. susan says:

    The petulant pair reminds me of all those glum faced Charles and Di pictures we used to see.

    Reply

  57. Dick says:

    Powell coming out against this last-ditch effort by RoveBushCheneyRummy to forever change the nature of the USofA is huge. A lot of forces are in high gear, and perhaps coming to a head.
    I agree with the growing chorus who are saying that a defining moment may well be at hand.

    Reply

  58. BaileyF says:

    As a Golden Retriever, I speak dog language very well, and the dog translator here has used too many commas. Also there should be an exclamation at the end rather than a period. We won’t quibble over the misplaced modifier.
    Can I have a treat now?

    Reply

  59. billmon says:

    The top picture (Powell and Bush) really reminds me of the ending to this Saturday Night Live sketch:
    http://snltranscripts.jt.org/75/75ginterview.phtml

    Reply

  60. Craig says:

    Every so often I look up what Condi Rice is up to and it’s usually not much of anything. Today, she did an interview on the Rush Limbaugh show. That’s pretty sad for a Secretary of State.
    When’s the last time Condi Rice, George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld or Dick Cheney have actually done something that’s turned out productive for the United States in world affairs?

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *