http://smokingmirrors.blogspot.com/2008 ... -test.html

"given that the official story is patently absurd. Anyone… anyone who promotes the official story; who accepts the official story, who oppresses those who doubt the official story, who does not question the official story, is involved or too stupid to pat their head and chew gum at the same time. Any presidential candidate who does not dispute the official story is a traitor to their nation and a tool of those who accomplished the attack.

It all comes down to 9/11. Everything that has happened has happened based on a lie. Everyone in government; in the media, in entertainment, in organized religion, in the public eye and in the public who accepts and promotes the official story is either a traitor or a tool. Everyone who does not stand forth and speak truth to power is a coward, a liar and complicit in mass murder. Everyone- everywhere can be measured according to this litmus test."

Matt Cooper had his 9/11 test on air recently:


<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/EOgwd5sLjjI&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/EOgwd5sLjjI&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

__________________
Cowardice asks the question - is it safe? Expediency asks the question - is it politic?
Vanity asks the question - is it popular? But Conscience asks the question - is it right?
And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular;but one must take it simply because it is right. -MLK

What on earth are you on about?

http://www.informationclearinghouse.inf ... e19413.htm

"Today in America we are witness to a great unraveling, the likes of which we have never seen before. There are no historical precedents. For many months now the official narrative about the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack on America has been coming apart, and I mean: at the seams. The official story about that terrible day is disintegrating. The trend shows no sign of abating and in recent weeks it even appears to have accelerated. At the present rate, soon there will be nothing left of the official version of events but a discordant echo and a series of extremely rude after shocks.

Is our nation prepared to face those rude shocks?

The unraveling began within weeks of the release of the 9/11 Commission Report (in July 2004) with the shocking revelation that members of the 9/11 commission were convinced that government officials, including NORAD generals, had deceived them during the investigation–––in essence, had lied to their faces during the hearings.[1] According to the Washington Post the members of the commission vented their frustrations at a special meeting in the summer of 2004. The panel even considered referring the matter to the Justice Department for a criminal investigation. "

__________________
Cowardice asks the question - is it safe? Expediency asks the question - is it politic?
Vanity asks the question - is it popular? But Conscience asks the question - is it right?
And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular;but one must take it simply because it is right. -MLK

And that means? (Other than your tendency to jump to conclusions?)

Here's an interesting online article about the We Are Change brigade, and what they believe in.

The writer seems balanced enough, but doesn't come to very positive conclusions about them

Anyone who claims there was nothing odd about 9/11, has to explain how a hijacker's passport could survive the explosion and impact, fly out of the pocket of a hijacker before he was incinerated, out through the metal of the plane, before it was vapourised, out through the building, and fly backwards (reverse to the direction of the plane) and end up in perfect condition in the street below.

I read a book called "Flat Earth News" written by a Guardian reporter. It never mentioned 9/11 or conspiracies, but interviewed Mi6 officers on planted news stories such as WMD tales and the like. It did have the following passage, however.

We also don't even know how it was found or who's passport it is. It's Atta's passport and it was found by an extensive search by the NYPD. Or its Satam Al Suqami passport found by a passer by.

Or perhaps several passports were found, and it was decided afterwards that that would be just too odd.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


NAMA: Mortgaging our future to pay for the past.

Seabhcan, Destiny,

How DARE you question the official story of 9/11!

Really. Shame on you. You people are mad.

............................................

I was chatting to an apparently well educated politico a while back, and when I said "I don't believe the official version of events. I think it was staged as the pretext to go launch a series of wars and clamp down on civil liberties", this person responded in the most vitriolic way... "Ahhh would ya F*CK OFF!".

Can someone explain to me what it is that makes people so vehemently uphold the official 9/11 story, when they have obviously done little or no research into the issue?

I've seen the same kind of people on TV.. these people scream and freak out at the suggestion that something is wrong (for the love of God, it's obvious!) with the official version of the events of 9/11. Why?

Why is it that people refuse to believe that the US government (along with the Brits, Israelis, Pakistanis, Turks or whoever), with a track record of killing millions of people (Vietnam, Nagasaki, Hiroshima), might kill a few thousand worthless Americans to achieve a greater goal?

I mean.. the damned evidence all points to a hoax.. 3 steel framed buildings collapsing into their own footprints (a bloody first in history.. never has even ONE steel framed building collapsed due to fire) within hours of each other, passports found intact... when the whole blood plane exploded into a massive fire ball, NO WRECKAGE at the Pennsylvania crash site. No arabic names on the passenger lists...

I love that phrase "a throwdown", as if the CIA have been training their operatives for years in honing their "throwdown" skills. Terms like that seem to lend more authority and credibility to what is simply being claimed as the planting of evidence.

The problem is people are tired of continually refuting these daft conspiracies. They don't bother anymore, so the theories are left to fester away on their own. Occasionally though, you get a glimpse of the conspiracy mindset, in the mainstream media.

Most recently, was Mohammed Al Fayed. Ruth Dudley Edwards wrote a good piece for the Telegraph which was syndicated in last Sundays Indo. Fayed has always sounded like a whinger and complainer extra-ordinaire. His failure to be accepted by the British establishment, has left a legacy of bitterness, which made it easy for him to slip into this mode of thinking. He is basically blaming the same establishment for the deaths of his son Dodi, and Diana. But the implication of what he is saying, is that the British intelligence services are being directed not by the British parliament, and government, but by Prince Philip and his son Charles! It led to bizarre scenes at the inquest, when both Fayed's lawyer, and the former head of MI6 were put in the embarrassing position of having to make and answer this specific allegation!

The whole conspiracy mindset in my opinion, seems to stem from a childish need for simple answers, and at the same time, a naivety about how the world actually works. Fayed has his own problems as well, including obviously an understandable level of grief for his dead son.

Get over it - the people responsible for 911 were a bunch of pissed off Muslims (to use a phrase from South Park).

"Naivety about how the world actually works"?

Right.

For one thing. Whether or not this was a conspiracy is NOT IN QUESTION:
Conspiracy means:
1. the act of conspiring.
2. an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot.
3. a combination of persons for a secret, unlawful, or evil purpose: He joined the conspiracy to overthrow the government.
4. Law. an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act.
5. any concurrence in action; combination in bringing about a given result.

The question is, who exactly conspired to bring about the events of 9/11?

We know that the 9/11 Commission ignored the information that Mohammed Atta the leader of the hijackers, received a bank transfer of $100,000 from Karachi through Dubai — money whose origins could be traced to the then ISI chief, Gen Mehmood Ahmed.

What was their comment on the funding? It went along the lines of: "The source of funding for the 9/11 attacks is of little consequence".