Lemme tell ya sumpin', folks. The key to getting "Bush & Co." ~ that overweening gaggle of arrogant, pathological liars and corrupt, greedy manipulators ~ out of power and out of our future, lay in the unravelling of what actually happened on 9/11.
Forget the Kennedy assassination. Forget Martin and Bobby. Forget Vietnam. Forget Watergate and Pinochet. Forget Panama and the Gulf War. Forget BCCI, Iran-Contra and Mena, AR. And forget the last two stolen presidential elections.
This stuff all matters, don't get me wrong, but it pales in comparison to what may very well have happened in New York and Washington on September 11th, 2001.
The possible treason behind that event is enough to put this entire Machiavellian pack of mongrels out of commission for the rest of our lifetimes.
So get with the program. Get yourself a serious education and back the people who are putting their lives on the line trying to get to the truth on this.
No more excuses! Turn off your useless televisions and start reading ...
while you still can!
"A Post-Election Wrap-Up:
Iraq, 9/11, Drugs, Cheney and Watergate Two"
by Peter Dale Scott
excerpt from a very long treatise [notes can be found by clicking on URL at the end of this post] by the highly regarded author and Professor of English from University of California at Berkeley:
"What Happened on September 11, 2001?
I know that many of my friends, left, center, and right, still resist the idea of looking beneath the surface of the official account of 9/11. But whatever one thinks, one must recognize that the still unexplained mysteries of 9/11, reinforced by books like these, have helped to define a new political constituency in America that spans and unites both left and right, and is determined to obtain answers.
There is still an appalling lack of resolution as to what happened in the USG on 9/11. The 9/11 Commission Report had to admit that information first supplied by NORAD, and then later corrected, was still simply wrong (though the Report's unsupported "corrections" to the record seem just as doubtful). [60]
Paul Thompson is much blunter:
NORAD's explanations about 9/11 have never made sense, and their new eagerness to be seen as an incompetent "Cold War vestige" is equally suspect. NORAD officials brazenly lied throughout their testimony. In the new NORAD timeline they presented, they even claimed that CNN first began showing images of the World Trade Center on fire at 8:57 when it is easily verifiable that CNN began doing this at 8:48. [CNN, Transcript, 9/11/01, NORAD Testimony, 5/23/03] Like their many other lies, one can see how this lie serves to cover up the extent of their failure. Unfortunately, the Independent Commission did not require that testimony be given under oath, so these officials cannot be charged with perjury. [61]
Even from the flawed data in the 9/11 Commission Report itself, it is clear that in pursuing the truth about this matter, all eyes should now be focused on the behavior of Cheney that day. As a non-conspiratorial article by Benjamin Demott in the October Harper's concludes, "Details in the President's, Vice President's, and other accounts of the framing and delivery of the `presidential' order to shoot down the hijacked airlines inspire severe doubt that the order came from Bush himself, rather than from an official -- Vice President Cheney -- with no military authority." [62] The bulk of DeMott's article focuses on ways that Bush (fortunately for him, not under oath) lied to the Commission.
We need a comparable article focusing on the apparent lies, to the Commission and elsewhere, by Cheney. As the webblogger Xymphora has noted,
apologists for the Official Story can't rely on the delay in Cheney's orders reaching the pilots to explain why no defensive action was taken. Someone still has to explain why NORAD acted as if it was under a standdown order. [63]
If there was a standdown order given that day, almost certainly Cheney had something to do with it.
Cheney's behavior on that day, as Paul Thompson points out, was extraordinary:
In his May 2003 testimony, Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta claimed that about 9:25 or 9:26, a few minutes after his arrival at the bunker beneath the White House, he overheard an aide tell Vice President Cheney that a hijacked plane headed toward Washington was 50 miles away, then 30 miles away (judging by the speed of the plane it would have been 50 miles from Washington around 9:27). [Norman Mineta Testimony, 5/23/03, Washington Post, 1/27/02, ABC News, 9/11/02] When the plane was announced to be 10 miles away, the aide asked the vice president, "Do the orders still stand?" Cheney replied, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?" Mineta inferred that the order was an order to shoot down the plane. [Norman Mineta Testimony, 5/23/03]. . . .
Why did Cheney and others track Flight 77 getting closer and closer to Washington, and fail to give any evacuation orders? How many of the 125 people killed inside the Pentagon could have been saved?
Mike Ruppert's book (citing a White House Press Release of 5/8/01) shows that, in the weeks before 9/11, "all counter-terror response planning and organization had been placed under the control of Dick Cheney" (337). Ruppert makes an initial if still circumstantial case, the strongest that I have seen so far, that "on the day of September 11th Richard Cheney was in full and complete control" of a properly functioning command system, which then deliberately let some of the hijacked planes hit their targets (591, cf. 411, 433). [64]
Ruppert argues that Cheney was in charge because of the multiple wargames running that day -- Vigilant Warrior, Vigilant Guardian, Northern Vigilance, an NRO exercise (name unknown), and Tripod II (a non-military biochemical attack exercise involving FEMA) -- that needed coordination from outside NORAD. [65] If he has no single source to nail this claim down, it is because of the extreme evasiveness shown by officials about that day, as for example:
When asked who was responsible for coordinating the multiple wargames running on the morning of September 11, 2001, General Ralph E. Eberhart, the man in charge of NORAD on the morning in question, replied "No Comment." [66]
This anecdote can stand as a synecdoche for the performance of the 9/11 Commission as a whole, and its studied efforts to avoid answering the most urgent questions about September 11.
Whatever the real truth, it is surely fair to quote here James Fenimore Cooper, as Benjamin DeMott does in the October Harper's: "In all the general concerns the public has a right to be treated with candor. Without this manly and republican quality . . . [American] institutions are converted into stupendous fraud."
Two years ago one of my wisest political friends suggested, not altogether seriously, that the first step in a program for a better America should be to "Impeach Cheney First." If enough people insist on learning what the 9/11 Commission covered up, that proposal could have legs. An impeachment debate as a political event in Congress may still be far off, but I believe that a vigorous pursuit of the 9/11 mysteries is likely to create a demand for it.
Of course it is most unlikely that the new Congress would actually impeach Cheney. But the case for malfeasance on 9/11, if pursued, could be a strong enough one to force Bush eventually to accept Cheney's resignation, much as Nixon in his Watergate crisis was forced to drop Agnew. And the resignation of Agnew (who had been regarded as Nixon's insurance against impeachment) was more the beginning than the end of a critical purgation, a crisis which, although painful, left America in the end better off than it had been before. "
it would behoove you to take a look through the entire piece by clicking below:
"A Post-Election Wrap-Up: Iraq, 9/11, Drugs, Cheney, and Watergate Two,"
by Peter Dale Scott
you also owe it to yourself to pay a visit to his official webSite:
Peter Dale Scott's webSite
and should you become as enamored as I am of this man's thought processes and writing abilities, you might be interested in his books, as well:
"Drugs, Oil, and War: The United States in Afghanistan, Colombia, and Indochina,"
by Peter Dale Scott
"Cocaine Politics: Drugs, Armies, and the CIA in Central America,"
by Peter Dale Scot and Jonathan Marshall
"Crime and Cover-up: the CIA, the Mafia and the Dallas-Watergate Connection,"
by Peter Dale Scott
"Deep Politics And The Death of JFK,"
by Peter Dale Scott
