9-11 demolition nutter killed attacking Pentagon

[RandomGuy]

Angry anti-gov't writing linked to Pentagon gunman

By MATT APUZZO and DEVLIN BARRETT, Associated Press Writers Matt Apuzzo And Devlin Barrett, Associated Press Writers – 44 mins ago
WASHINGTON – A California man killed in a shootout with Pentagon police drove cross-country and arrived outside the military headquarters armed with two semiautomatic weapons, authorities said Friday. Internet postings linked to the lone shooting suspect reflect long-held anti-government anger.

John Patrick Bedell, 36, pulled a handgun at a Pentagon entrance, shot two police officers and was mortally wounded in an exchange of gunfire, authorities said. The two officers were hospitalized briefly with minor injuries.

A blog connected to Bedell via the social networking site LinkedIn outlines his growing distrust of the federal government. It gives credence to the idea that a criminal enterprise run out of the government could have staged the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

It was one of several conspiracy-laden Internet postings linked to Bedell to surface since Thursday night's shooting.

Authorities said Bedell, of Hollister, Calif., had previous run-ins with the law. They found no known connection to terrorist groups or ideologies, investigators said.

The attack outside the massive Defense Department headquarters appeared to be a case of "a single individual who had issues," Richard Keevill, chief of Pentagon police, said Friday.

Bedell died Thursday night from head wounds. Officials said the two wounded guards were officers Jeffery Amos and Marvin Carraway, both of whom returned fire. They said a third guard they did not name also fired.

Reached by telephone, Amos declined to answer any questions about the shooting but said he was doing OK.

"I'm fine and my family is fine," he told The Associated Press. "I just thank the Lord that he shielded me when all of this took place."

Bedell drove across country, including a stop at a motel in Reno, Nevada, law enforcement officials said.

It was not immediately clear how long he stayed there, or if it was anything more than a stopover on his way to a violent end.

Hints of a deep-seated mistrust of government emerged in Internet postings linked to Bedell. A blog connected to his LinkedIn profile contained a two-part treatise on big government, including its vulnerability to being controlled by a criminal organization.

"This organization, like so many murderous governments throughout history, would see the sacrifice of thousands of its citizens, in an event such as the September 11 attacks, as a small cost in order to perpetuate its barbaric control," the blog post read.

Keevill described Bedell as "very well-educated" and well-dressed, wearing a suit that blended with commuters when he showed up at the Pentagon's subway entrance about 6:40 p.m. But he was concealing two 9 millimeter semiautomatic weapons and "many magazines" of ammunition, Keevill said.

When Bedell seemed to reach into his pocket for worker identification, he was instead reaching for a gun, Keevill said.

"He just reached in his pocket, pulled out a gun and started shooting" at point-blank range, Keevill said. "He walked up very cool. He had no real emotion on his face."

Although the gunfire near the subway exit in Arlington, Va., lasted less than a minute, Keevill said, numerous shots were fired.

There was more ammunition in Bedell's car, which authorities found in a nearby mall parking garage.

"He came here from California," Keevill said. "We were able to identify certain locations that he spent that last several weeks making his way from the West coast to the East coast."

Keevill said he did not know what motivated the shooting: "I have no idea what his intentions were."

On a Wikipedia page linked to Bedell, a user by the name JPatrickBedell revealed ill feelings toward the government and the armed forces and made reference to another conspiracy theory.

JPatrickBedell wrote that he was "determined to see that justice is served" in the death of Marine Col. James Sabow, who was found dead in the backyard of his California home in 1991. The death was ruled a suicide but the case has long been the source of theories of a cover up. Sabow's family has maintained that he was murdered because he was about to expose covert military operations in Central America involving drug smuggling.

That posting can be linked to Bedell through court documents matching the shooter's birth date but Keevill said Friday that authorities had not made "a final determination" that the shooter was the same Bedell.

On the Internet posting, user JPatrickBedell wrote the Sabow case was "a step toward establishing the truth of events such as the September 11 demolitions."

That same posting railed against the government's enforcement of marijuana laws and included links to the author's 2006 court case in Orange County, Calif., involving allegations of cultivating marijuana and resisting a police officer.

The assault at the very threshold of the Pentagon — the U.S. capital's ground zero on Sept. 11, 2001 — came four months after a deadly attack on the Army's Fort Hood, Texas, post allegedly by a U.S. Army psychiatrist with radical Islamic leanings.

Hatred of the government motivated a man in Texas last month to fly a small plane into a building housing Internal Revenue Service offices, killing an IRS employee and himself.

The shooting resembled one in January in which a gunman walked up to the security entrance of a Las Vegas courthouse and opened fire with a shotgun, killing one officer and wounding another before being gunned down in return fire.

The subway station in Arlington is immediately adjacent to the Pentagon building, a five-sided northern Virginia colossus across the Potomac River from Washington. Since a redesign following the 2001 terrorist attack on the Pentagon, riders take a long escalator ride to the surface from the underground station, then pass through a security check outside the doors of the building, where further security awaits.

Keevill said the gunman gave no clue to the officers at the checkpoint about what he was going to do.

"There was no distress," he said. "When he reached into his pocket, they assumed he was going to get a pass and he came up with a gun."

Ronald Domingues, 74, who lives next door to Bedell's parents in a gated golf course community in Hollister, said he doesn't know the family well. But he said Bedell sometimes lived with his parents and struck him "like a normal young man."

[TeyshaBlue]

That's what they want you to think.
Bedell was actually a CIA operative that knew the whole story.

:lmao

[clambake]

he couldn't have been a CIA agent.

cheney didn't out him.

[DarrinS]

Evidently, he was a right-wing extremist tea bagger, too.


Predictable.


http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0305/John-Patrick-Bedell-Did-right-wing-extremism-lead-to-shooting

[boutons_deux]

Crazy people, you know the avg teabagger and red-state bubba, are very suggestible as to why they are losers and who they should blame.

With the Repugs and hate media fomenting violence. no surprises.

[clambake]

i'd say he's just a nut.

[ChumpDumper]

Not enough information to classify him as anything but a nut.

[Galileo]

At least he didn't bring down the Twin Towers and murder 3000 people.

[Galileo]

On the Internet posting, user JPatrickBedell wrote the Sabow case was "a step toward establishing the truth of events such as the September 11 demolitions."



9/11 has been proven to be an inside job a long time ago.

[ChumpDumper]

9/11 has been proven to be an inside job a long time ago.:lmao

[Galileo]

:lmao

:lmao :lmao

[ChumpDumper]

:lmao :lmao:lmao :lmao :lmao

[FromWayDowntown]

It's a CONSPIRACY!!!

[Blake]

9/11 has been proven to be an inside job a long time ago.

At first I thought it might have been you....

but you're here....

....anyone seen mouse lately?

[doobs]

Hey Galileo, do you think this shooting was an inside job, too?

[Darrin]

This is the danger of manipulationg fears right now. Everyone has their concerns and they are legitimate. The news tells us everyday that we're headed for disaster economically, and we hear also how broken our government is. We have scandals in Charlie Rangel and filibusters with Jim Bunning. Health-Care is valuable to our long-term economic growth, but that is not the argument the President and the Democrats have made since last summer.

There are a lot of polarizing figures on the political stage. President Obama has become, to many, a socialist. That's a fear that I do not share. However, my blood boils anytime I watch Dick Cheney booked on This Week or at a CPAC convention because of his actions in the 43rd Administration. Karl Rove is another figure.

We have to tone this down and that is why yesterday's story was so important about the RNC messages. Fear is so heightened right now that it is gasoline on the fire. Extremists can take action like this. This is the second disgruntled lone-wolf to attack our government in just the last two weeks. If the fear is rallied anymore, I fear we will see a riot infront of Goldman Sachs, or an attempt on Congress.

I have stated some of my views, but I found this last night. I put it on my facebook page and I think it is worthy advice, now, before something truly destructive takes place:

0_Vll-t0H6A

Please remember our common humanity before we tear at the fabric of our nation, our community. Do we wish to put ourselves in danger, to feel insecure in our homes, to write a chapter of history we will regret? This is not a time for hyperbole or cheap remarks or finger-pointing. It is a time to identify the problems we face, meet them head-on, and to solve it. It is a time for honest discussion not blatant attempts at discord. I beg of all of you to try and be civil wherever you go, to try and understand your fellow countrymen, and stand against those that put us in danger, no matter their creed or party. We are entrusted with American ideals--please try and protect them as you would a child. I want this nation to survive and I do not want to lower my eyes when I think back on this time.

[ElNono]

Good thing the police officers only had minor injuries... :tu

[Yonivore]

Sounds like it could have been Nbadan or Galileo.

[Yonivore]

I love the way the left-leaning media are presuming to know this nut's politics...it's as if they're developing some narrative.

John Patrick Bedell: Did right-wing extremism lead to shooting? (http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0305/John-Patrick-Bedell-Did-right-wing-extremism-lead-to-shooting)


Authorities have identified John Patrick Bedell as the gunman in the Pentagon shooting. He appears to have been a right-wing extremist with virulent antigovernment feelings.

Truther and Registered Democrat...yep, I'd say the CSM had him pegged, eh?

[baseline bum]

Christian Science (:lol) Monitor is left-leaning? What the fuck? :lmao

[Yonivore]

Christian Science (:lol) Monitor is left-leaning? What the fuck? :lmao
Using the term "right-wing extremist" pretty much cast the die -- for that columnist, anyway.

Particularly when it is known the nut is a Democrat and a Bush-hating Truther.

[smeagol]

Conspiracy throrists are some of the dumbest people one can encounter . . .

[mookie2001]

besides foreigners opening their esl mouths about a national tragedy

[Yonivore]

Conspiracy throrists are some of the dumbest people one can encounter . . .
Well, at least this one thinned the gene pool without causing too much harm.

[SpursNextRomanEmpire]

9/11 has been proven to be an inside job a long time ago.
lol dumbbbbb

[Yonivore]

lol dumbbbbb
Don't feed the monkey...he'll only start flinging poo.

[Nbadan]

The faith-in-Bush crowd doesn't like dissent...



John Farmer served as Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission, where his areas of responsibility included assessing the national response to the terrorist attacks and evaluating the current state of national preparedness for terrorist attacks and natural disasters, he also served as attorney general of New Jersey (1999-2002), as chief counsel to Governor Whitman, and as a federal prosecutor. He recently served as a subject matter/rule of law expert on security to the special envoy for Middle East regional security. He is currently a partner of a New Jersey law form and an adjunct professor of national security law at Rutgers University Law School. His editorials and articles have appeared in "The New York Times" and elsewhere

So what did Farmer say about the 911 Commission?

Description:

As of the 9/11 Commission’s one of the primary authors report, John Farmer is proud of his and his colleagues’ work. Yet he came away from the experience convinced that there was a further story to be told, one he was uniquely qualified to write.

Now that story can be told. Tape recordings, transcripts, and contemporaneous records that had been classified have since been declassified, and the inspector general’s investigations of government conduct have been completed. Drawing on his knowledge of those sources, as well as his years as an attorney in public and private practice, Farmer reconstructs the truth of what happened on that fateful day and the disastrous circumstances that allowed it: the institutionalized disconnect between what those on the ground knew and what those in power did. He reveals — terrifyingly and illuminatingly — the key moments in the years, months, weeks, and days that preceded the attacks, then descends almost in real time through the attacks themselves, revealing them as they have never before been seen

Ultimately Farmer builds the inescapably convincing case that the official version not only is almost entirely untrue but serves to create a false impression of order and security. The ground truth that Farmer captures tells a very different story — a story that is doomed to be repeated unless the systemic failures he reveals are confronted and remedied. .



So let me just repeat that to let it sink in .... The official story is "almost entirely untrue." So what IS true? Hell if I know.

And check this out:


Farmer himself states that "at some level of the government, at some point in time ... there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened."

Link (http://www.houghtonmifflinbooks.com/catalog/titledetail.cfm?titleNumber=1098832)

[mookie2001]

well naturally if one would read the report and then try to write a high school style outline book report of what was actually included, they would realize what a load of lord of the rings style bullshit was in the report

[Nbadan]

Even the 911 Commission didn't buy the bullshit they were selling the American public and referred the case to prosecutors...


Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon's initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public rather than a reflection of the fog of events on that day, according to sources involved in the debate.

Suspicion of wrongdoing ran so deep that the 10-member commission, in a secret meeting at the end of its tenure in summer 2004, debated referring the matter to the Justice Department for criminal investigation, according to several commission sources. Staff members and some commissioners thought that e-mails and other evidence provided enough probable cause to believe that military and aviation officials violated the law by making false statements to Congress and to the commission, hoping to hide the bungled response to the hijackings, these sources said.

In the end, the panel agreed to a compromise, turning over the allegations to the inspectors general for the Defense and Transportation departments, who can make criminal referrals if they believe they are warranted, officials said.

"We to this day don't know why NORAD [the North American Aerospace Command] told us what they told us," said Thomas H. Kean, the former New Jersey Republican governor who led the commission. "It was just so far from the truth. . . . It's one of those loose ends that never got tied."

Although the commission's landmark report made it clear that the Defense Department's early versions of events on the day of the attacks were inaccurate, the revelation that it considered criminal referrals reveals how skeptically those reports were viewed by the panel and provides a glimpse of the tension between it and the Bush administration.

Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/01/AR2006080101300.html)

[Nbadan]

We're now learning that a lot of what the 9/11 Commission was given as "factual intelligence" regarding al Qaeda's role in 9/11 was produced under torture. Everyone should be aware that the Commission began from the point of view that the most important "facts" were already known: That al Qaeda alone was responsible for 9/11. I've been saying for years that the Bush administration produced LESS evidence to substantiate that claim than they did to substantiate that Iraq had WMD, that they were an "immanent threat," and that they had ties with al Qaeda and, thus, 9/11 itself. We now know with certainty that they LIED about all of that and I keep asking people, why would you assume that they didn't lie about al Qaeda's role in 9/11?

Mostly this question has been ignored and it is now time to bring it out into the light along with the torture issue. Those of us who have accepted the "truther" label and have been black balled as "tin foil hat wearing crazy conspiracy theorists" may have our differences of opinion, some may be truly "nutty" some may even be disinformation agents -- but those of us who are sincere in our concern have always been united about the need for ONE THING: A new, non-partisan, independent and transparent investigation with subpoena power. We have a lot of unanswered questions we'd like government officials to answer under oath. I'd personally like to know why the Bush administration fought against having any Commission at all. Why they underfunded it and gave it a set time limit. Why they placed Philip Zelikow as its executive director. Precisely what interaction Zelikow had with the White House, and specifically Karl Rove, during his tenure in that position. I'd like to know why Dick Cheney and George W Bush refused to testify before the Commission separately and under oath. Why they only agreed to answer questions, not under oath, in private, with no notes taken or records kept. And all that is just the very thinnest sliver of the tip of the iceberg. There are many more questions that need to be asked regarding that tip of the iceberg that is above water but, below the surface of the water, that is, deep in the bowls of the national security state infrastructure, there are far more questions. The victim families of 9/11 deserve answers, the American people deserve answers, the people of Afghanistan and Iraq deserve answers. For FAR too long we have allowed radical changes in our domestic and foreign policy be predicated upon an seminal event about which we were not told the truth. We need to know how much of it is true and how much of it is not. IF the events of 9/11 were aided and abetted in any way by yet to be identified forces within the national security state apparatus, those responsible are, at the very least, accessories to mass murder, treason, war crimes, crimes against humanity and a cover-up so thorough that it has continued to the present.

The reason why this is important and the reason why I and many, many others have been "down the conspiracy rabbit hole" for all these years is because we believe that without a clear answer to this question, none of us will be safe. At BASE this is a national security issue, one which dares to ask the question: Does the national security infrastructure currently in place protect the American people, or does it protect private interests within the Military Industrial Complex at the expenses of public interest and security? Does it use the cloak of "national security" to hide its actual purpose? Given the TRILLIONS of dollars that have gone into the so called "war on terror," money that has been reallocated from one sector of the economy into the hands of a military/industrial/oil elite -- given that the government has used 9/11 to ascribe greater power than ever to surveil the public and put in place policies which threaten our civil liberties -- given the thousands of US military personnel that have been killed, wounded and traumatized by a two-front war in admittedly PETROLEUM RICH regions of the planet -- given that untold hundreds of thousands of Afghani and Iraqi citizens have been slaughtered -- given that prisoners have been rendered, tortured, held without any jurisprudence -- isn't it LONG past time we had clear honest answers regarding the events of that day? Personally, I'm all for having a REAL "war on terror" -- and by that I mean shining a light on the deep state, its ties to the military industrial complex, government and military intelligence, corporate interests (especially oil and Wall Street banking interests) and that underbelly of global capital, international criminal syndicates that trade in armaments, drugs, prostitution and bloody terror.

It is LONG past time to take the gag off Sibel Edmonds for one. But, again, that is just the tip of the tip of the iceberg.

[mookie2001]

I'd like to know why Dick Cheney and George W Bush refused to testify before the Commission separately and under oath. Why they only agreed to answer questions, not under oath, in private, with no notes taken or records kept.
exactly

but i'll be told they were inept and too stupid to do anything... ever, even though they never have to go on record so we'll never find out shit

people will quote southpark, google image search tinfoil

round and round we'll go until 9-11 is like the 64 gulf of tonkin incident, where the small % of people who even know what the fuck the real questions are- think its an old man book conspiracy

and chumpdumpers response is to ask US questions, like there arent enough questions to go around

[Nbadan]

It's still a mystery why NORAD and the FAA lied to the 911 Commission


For more than two years after the attacks, officials with NORAD and the FAA provided inaccurate information about the response to the hijackings in testimony and media appearances. Authorities suggested that U.S. air defenses had reacted quickly, that jets had been scrambled in response to the last two hijackings and that fighters were prepared to shoot down United Airlines Flight 93 if it threatened Washington.

In fact, the commission reported a year later, audiotapes from NORAD's Northeast headquarters and other evidence showed clearly that the military never had any of the hijacked airliners in its sights and at one point chased a phantom aircraft -- American Airlines Flight 11 -- long after it had crashed into the World Trade Center.

Maj. Gen. Larry Arnold and Col. Alan Scott told the commission that NORAD had begun tracking United 93 at 9:16 a.m., but the commission determined that the airliner was not hijacked until 12 minutes later. The military was not aware of the flight until after it had crashed in Pennsylvania.

These and other discrepancies did not become clear until the commission, forced to use subpoenas, obtained audiotapes from the FAA and NORAD, officials said. The agencies' reluctance to release the tapes -- along with e-mails, erroneous public statements and other evidence -- led some of the panel's staff members and commissioners to believe that authorities sought to mislead the commission and the public about what happened on Sept. 11.

LInk (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/01/AR2006080101300.html)

..Gulf of Tonkin, Lusitania, Mexican-American War, the list goes on and on...

By now we're near experts at concealing the fact that our fuck-ups, failures, and malevolent factionalism are the cause of a majority of conflicts.

Just saying, let the historical record show that if 9/11 went off exactly as the Commission reports, it would be the first historical example of a foreign war where the U.S. did not incite or start hostilities and conceal the truth from the polity.

Like I said earlier, I don't know what the whole truth is, but what I do know is that what has been labeled the truth is far from it...

[gollum]

Many in here not only don't want the truth they run from it.

[Nbadan]

Many in here not only don't want the truth they run from it.

I think its a mental illness really....

[ChumpDumper]

What are you doing to make your desire for this new investigation a reality?

[Nbadan]

Why is it up to me?

[ChumpDumper]

Why is it up to me?Must not be that important to you.

[Marcus Bryant]

Hysterical Conspiracism. What begins in a tradition of healthy skepticism culminates in a universal suspicion of anything presented as established wisdom. As Francis Wheen puts it in his recent book, Strange Days Indeed: The 1970s: The Golden Age of Paranoia (http://www.amazon.com/Strange-Days-Indeed-Golden-Paranoia/dp/1586488457/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1267546350&sr=1-1&tag=reasonmagazineA), “You start by reading your horoscope in the newspaper; then you dabble in chakra balancing or feng shui, saying that it is important to keep an open mind; after a while your mind is so open that your brains fall out, and you read the Protocols of the Elders of Zion without noticing anything amiss.”

No graduate of the Anglo-American university system in the past 60 years has lacked for an introduction to this pervasive theorizing of dark and hidden forces, which gallops across the political spectrum from right-wing fantasies about Freemasons to left-wing hysteria over the Warren Report.

The Jewish question, as Wheen rightly apprehended, seems to exercise over-active imaginations more than anything else. In the wake of the killing of Hamas militant Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai, the BBC Radio 4's PM program allowed one Gordon Thomas, author of Gideon's Spies, a book about the Israeli intelligence agency Mossad, to state the following: “They have a whole backup system called 'asylum.' These are people, local residents, Jewish people, who help the Mossad. It is estimated to be in the world about half a million—some people say a million; I tend to say it's about half a million—all of them Mossad people.” Avoid all open windows at your next bar mitzvah.

The strategic advantages of the hysterical conspiracist are as follows:

1. He never risks appearing ovine or “naïve” because he is perpetually attuned to What Is Really Happening. What others might describe as pigheaded resistance to facts, he maintains as his unsullied record of un-falsifiable claims. As Johnson remarked to Boswell over dinner at the Mitre, “It is always easy to be on the negative side… If a man were now to deny that there is salt upon the table, you could not reduce him to absurdity.” Trying to convince someone who insists that a plane did not fly into the Pentagon on September 11 is no easier.

2. Where he does advance an “alternative” explanation of events, the hysterical conspiracist usually maintains a small distance from absolute certainty—just in case. Hedge phrases or coy locutions such as “I’m not saying necessarily…” and “Isn’t it interesting that…” exist to exonerate the conspiracist after the fact, preparing him for intellectual victory either way. Witness the qualifiers in this sample sentence from Tariq Ali’s The Clash of Fundamentalisms: “[T]here exists no exact, incontrovertible evidence about who ordered the hits on New York and Washington or when the plan was first mooted.”

3. The hysterical conspiracist forces his opponents to fritter away their time and resources in debunking his non-theories as “not even wrong.” Popular Mechanics might have devoted a cover story to flying cars or Fermilab cyclotrons in March 2005. Instead it had to teach (http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html) Rosie O’Donnell how steel girders melt in skyscrapers.

Reason (http://reason.com/archives/2010/03/02/the-five-varieties-of-bad-poli)

[RandomGuy]

Even the 911 Commission didn't buy the bullshit they were selling the American public and referred the case to prosecutors...

Staff members and some commissioners thought that e-mails and other evidence provided enough probable cause to believe that military and aviation officials violated the law by making false statements to Congress and to the commission, hoping to hide the bungled response to the hijackings, these sources said.


Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/01/AR2006080101300.html)

Amazing to see what parts you choose to highlight, and the parts you didn't...

People covering their asses, lying about how they messed up.

BFD.

That would be about what one would expect, but is hardly the proof of "an inside job".

Looking at life through conspiracy-colored glasses forces one to see plots everywhere.

Should SOMEONE have been held accountable? Possibly.

Did a few people actively lie to investigators looking into the horrific events and try to make themselves look as blameless as possible? You bet.

Did the 9-11 commission have any reason whatsoever to think that parts of the government were "in on it?" No.

To think otherwise is to put something into the evidence that just isn't there.

[RandomGuy]

We're now learning that a lot of what the 9/11 Commission was given as "factual intelligence" regarding al Qaeda's role in 9/11 was produced under torture. Everyone should be aware that the Commission began from the point of view that the most important "facts" were already known: That al Qaeda alone was responsible for 9/11. I've been saying for years that the Bush administration produced LESS evidence to substantiate that claim than they did to substantiate that Iraq had WMD, that they were an "immanent threat," and that they had ties with al Qaeda and, thus, 9/11 itself. We now know with certainty that they LIED about all of that and I keep asking people, why would you assume that they didn't lie about al Qaeda's role in 9/11?

Mostly this question has been ignored and it is now time to bring it out into the light along with the torture issue. Those of us who have accepted the "truther" label and have been black balled as "tin foil hat wearing crazy conspiracy theorists" may have our differences of opinion, some may be truly "nutty" some may even be disinformation agents -- but those of us who are sincere in our concern have always been united about the need for ONE THING: A new, non-partisan, independent and transparent investigation with subpoena power. We have a lot of unanswered questions we'd like government officials to answer under oath. I'd personally like to know why the Bush administration fought against having any Commission at all. Why they underfunded it and gave it a set time limit. Why they placed Philip Zelikow as its executive director. Precisely what interaction Zelikow had with the White House, and specifically Karl Rove, during his tenure in that position. I'd like to know why Dick Cheney and George W Bush refused to testify before the Commission separately and under oath. Why they only agreed to answer questions, not under oath, in private, with no notes taken or records kept. And all that is just the very thinnest sliver of the tip of the iceberg. There are many more questions that need to be asked regarding that tip of the iceberg that is above water but, below the surface of the water, that is, deep in the bowls of the national security state infrastructure, there are far more questions. The victim families of 9/11 deserve answers, the American people deserve answers, the people of Afghanistan and Iraq deserve answers. For FAR too long we have allowed radical changes in our domestic and foreign policy be predicated upon an seminal event about which we were not told the truth. We need to know how much of it is true and how much of it is not. IF the events of 9/11 were aided and abetted in any way by yet to be identified forces within the national security state apparatus, those responsible are, at the very least, accessories to mass murder, treason, war crimes, crimes against humanity and a cover-up so thorough that it has continued to the present.

The reason why this is important and the reason why I and many, many others have been "down the conspiracy rabbit hole" for all these years is because we believe that without a clear answer to this question, none of us will be safe. At BASE this is a national security issue, one which dares to ask the question: Does the national security infrastructure currently in place protect the American people, or does it protect private interests within the Military Industrial Complex at the expenses of public interest and security? Does it use the cloak of "national security" to hide its actual purpose? Given the TRILLIONS of dollars that have gone into the so called "war on terror," money that has been reallocated from one sector of the economy into the hands of a military/industrial/oil elite -- given that the government has used 9/11 to ascribe greater power than ever to surveil the public and put in place policies which threaten our civil liberties -- given the thousands of US military personnel that have been killed, wounded and traumatized by a two-front war in admittedly PETROLEUM RICH regions of the planet -- given that untold hundreds of thousands of Afghani and Iraqi citizens have been slaughtered -- given that prisoners have been rendered, tortured, held without any jurisprudence -- isn't it LONG past time we had clear honest answers regarding the events of that day? Personally, I'm all for having a REAL "war on terror" -- and by that I mean shining a light on the deep state, its ties to the military industrial complex, government and military intelligence, corporate interests (especially oil and Wall Street banking interests) and that underbelly of global capital, international criminal syndicates that trade in armaments, drugs, prostitution and bloody terror.

It is LONG past time to take the gag off Sibel Edmonds for one. But, again, that is just the tip of the tip of the iceberg.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/beam_me_up/26

Would it kill you to source some of this stuff?

That is a fairly reasonable essay.

BUT

I don't see how it would change much, other than show how truly clueless Bush was and how dickish Cheney was.

Al-Qaeda attacked the twin towers with bombs, failed to destroy the buildings then worked up another plan and tried again in a ers before we really all became fully aware of the threat posed.

I don't see what "answers" would be had that would mean more than a squirt of piss into a pool.

[LnGrrrR]

I would understand if the DoD and FAA lied, but assume it's because they screwed up, not to some overriding conspiracy.

Frankly, I don't think Bush and Co. are intelligent enough to pull that off.

Oh, Bush and ESPECIALLY Cheney never said ANYTHING on the record, if they could help it.

[Debbie Downer]

Looks like a sad day for RandomLie and Chump as they know the truth is coming out now.

[ChumpDumper]

Looks like a sad day for RandomLie and Chump as they know the truth is coming out now.:lol

Yes, you guys are working so hard to start that new investigation. :rolleyes

[Nbadan]

I would understand if the DoD and FAA lied, but assume it's because they screwed up, not to some overriding conspiracy.

Frankly, I don't think Bush and Co. are intelligent enough to pull that off.

Oh, Bush and ESPECIALLY Cheney never said ANYTHING on the record, if they could help it.

Could very well be....but I guess the question that begs to be asked is if it was just a colossal screw-up by the FAA, NORAD, on down the line... was it negligent ? and if it was negligent, was it criminal?

..and if it was criminal, was it a conspiracy? See how it can quickly spiral....

[Nbadan]

Looks like a sad day for RandomLie and Chump as they know the truth is coming out now.

Random-Chump have had better days....but the ball is still clearly in their court, but in time who knows? The Kennedy Assassination swung, perhaps some day 9/11 will swing too.....in the meantime focusing on WTC1 and WTC2 is a waste of time...if anything, focusing on WTC7, Huff Aviation and the Pakistani connection/terrorists connection is time better spent..

[ChumpDumper]

Random-Chump have had better days....but the ball is still clearly in their court, but in time who knows?Why is the ball in our court?

You have yet to present any possible credible theory. Indeed, no theory at all.
The Kennedy Assassination swungSwung to what? A cottage industry of nutters and a bad feature film?


perhaps some day 9/11 will swing too.....Yes, with real men of action like you and mouse, I really see things happening in the truther movement in the future
in the meantime focusing on WTC1 and WTC2 is a waste of time...if anything, focusing on WTC7, Huff Aviation and the Pakistani connection/terrorists connection is time better spent..Tell us your theory involving WTC7, Huff Aviation and the Pakistani connection/terrorists.

Let the world hear what you think really happened on 9/11.

It's been almost nine years. What are you waiting for?

[Winehole23]

http://www.primermagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/7Facts/Facts_Toilet.jpg

I can see the spiral, but nutter theories are zombie turds. Now and then they return to forage for human brains, apparently.

[ChumpDumper]

http://www.primermagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/7Facts/Facts_Toilet.jpg

I can see the spiral, but nutter theories are zombie turds. Now and then they return to forage for human brains, apparently.But that's just it -- they have no theories.

Not one.

Just bad YouTubes with spooky synth music.

After eight years, you'd think there would be at least one.

[Blake]

The faith-in-Bush crowd doesn't like dissent...




So what did Farmer say about the 911 Commission?

Description:

As of the 9/11 Commission’s one of the primary authors report, John Farmer is proud of his and his colleagues’ work. Yet he came away from the experience convinced that there was a further story to be told, one he was uniquely qualified to write.

Now that story can be told. Tape recordings, transcripts, and contemporaneous records that had been classified have since been declassified, and the inspector general’s investigations of government conduct have been completed. Drawing on his knowledge of those sources, as well as his years as an attorney in public and private practice, Farmer reconstructs the truth of what happened on that fateful day and the disastrous circumstances that allowed it: the institutionalized disconnect between what those on the ground knew and what those in power did. He reveals — terrifyingly and illuminatingly — the key moments in the years, months, weeks, and days that preceded the attacks, then descends almost in real time through the attacks themselves, revealing them as they have never before been seen

Ultimately Farmer builds the inescapably convincing case that the official version not only is almost entirely untrue but serves to create a false impression of order and security. The ground truth that Farmer captures tells a very different story — a story that is doomed to be repeated unless the systemic failures he reveals are confronted and remedied. .




And check this out:



Link (http://www.houghtonmifflinbooks.com/catalog/titledetail.cfm?titleNumber=1098832)

the link is no good.

how much does Farmer's book cost?

[DMX7]

I love the way the left-leaning media are presuming to know this nut's politics...it's as if they're developing some narrative.

www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0305/John-Patrick-Bedell-Did-right-wing-extremism-lead-to-shooting


Truther and Registered Democrat...yep, I'd say the CSM had him pegged, eh?

lol :lmao

[Nbadan]

You have yet to present any possible credible theory. Indeed, no theory at all.

Pff...it already took NIST 6 years to disprove its own theory once...in 20 years I suspect they'll have yet a new theory that disproves their current theory....talk about not having a theory at all...

[Nbadan]

Swung to what? A cottage industry of nutters and a bad feature film?

Try the majority of the American public...

[Nbadan]

Yes, with real men of action like you and mouse, I really see things happening in the truther movement in the future

...perhaps if you were better at proving your case, the nuttery would end...

[ChumpDumper]

...perhaps if you were better at proving your case, the nuttery would end...Not at all. You never actually read any explanations I post. You simply change the subject and hope everyone forgets I posted it.

Ramdom Guy went through the trouble of providing links to many quite helpful sites when it comes to 9/11 research, and I doubt you have explored those at all. You already have your mind made up -- even though you won't say what you think really happened on 9/11.

[Winehole23]

He won't?

Is this related to the *no theory* motif you alluded to in another thread?

[ChumpDumper]

Oh yeah. Asking a truther what he thinks is the truth is the easiest way to shut down any 9/11 thread.

[Winehole23]

Are they pussies withholding unpopular views, or just modestly trying to cover up their ignorance -- or both -- in your view?

[ChumpDumper]

I figure they know anything they might come up with will be pretty easily picked apart, but that just makes me wonder why they don't even bother to check out whatever germ of a theory they may have to see if it's even possible -- for their own satisfaction if nothing else. Maybe they find the idea of a conspiracy so attractive that they would rather carry around that vague notion than do anything that could threaten it.

[Winehole23]

Not bothering to check guy?

Check.

[Winehole23]

Flirts with conspiracies guy?

Rampant.

[Winehole23]

That guy posts here every day.

[gollum]

:corn:

[RandomGuy]

Random-Chump have had better days....but the ball is still clearly in their court, but in time who knows? The Kennedy Assassination swung, perhaps some day 9/11 will swing too.....in the meantime focusing on WTC1 and WTC2 is a waste of time...if anything, focusing on WTC7, Huff Aviation and the Pakistani connection/terrorists connection is time better spent..

I dunno. The loose change asshats are slowly backing away from the controlled demolition nonsense because they know that is one of the weakest bits of their arguments.

The fact that they went for it at all in the first place says something rather important about the lack of intellectual rigor involved.

WTC7 demolition theories are just as stupid as the ones about the other buildings, and, in time, will die the cold and lonely death of all shitty conspiracy theories.

[RandomGuy]

He won't?

Is this related to the *no theory* motif you alluded to in another thread?

Pretty much.

Ask anybody with the conspiracy chip on their shoulder to flesh it out, and they pretty much start giving you a big load of ignore.

On some level they subconsciously refuse to really logically examine the underlying requirements for their theories to be true.

This is because, if one looks at just about any theory, one has to add more and more assumptions and co-conspirators, geometrically increasing the implausibility to the point where Occams Razor kicks in with vengeance.

I once tried to flesh out how many people it would take to say, fake all the moon landings and cover that up, and came up with thousands, if not tens of thousands of people with first-hand, direct knowledge, yet magically not one of these people has ratted the thing out.

Humans aren't that good at keeping secrets, that works against such conspiracies.

That is really the underlying reason, I think. Conspiracy adherents know on some level, just how weak their theories are, and their refusal to address those weak points is simply a manifestation of confirmation bias and the persistance of belief.

[Blake]

...for their own satisfaction if nothing else.

that is what I wonder as well

[mookie2001]

Loose change!


I saw that on YouTube!

[Spurminator]

NBAdan doesn't believe any of this stuff. It's just more poo to fling at the other sideline. All in the game.

[ChumpDumper]

I dunno. The loose change asshats are slowly backing away from the controlled demolition nonsense because they know that is one of the weakest bits of their arguments.

The fact that they went for it at all in the first place says something rather important about the lack of intellectual rigor involved.Remember the "plane pods" in the 1st edition? :lol

[Nbadan]

He won't?

Is this related to the *no theory* motif you alluded to in another thread?

More like Random-Chump likes to put the cart before the horses...he himself has admitted to thinking that the Bush Administration failed its job to protect the homeland from Jan 01 - Sept 12, 01..

[Nbadan]

There are many levels of conspiracy theory here, for instance, the hardest Bush supporter would think that Random-Chump himself is a conspiracy theorist for thinking the Bush Administration acted any way other than valiantly on 911...

[Nbadan]

WTC7 demolition theories are just as stupid as the ones about the other buildings, and, in time, will die the cold and lonely death of all shitty conspiracy theories.

Alex Jones should have been the dead give-away..

....still unexplained are the various explosions reported by sources in WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 on lower floors before any of the tower collapsed...explosions that can be heard on recordings....

.....the Bush-faith crowd is just as guilty of glossing over facts that don't fit into their theory as 9/11 truthers...

[Nbadan]

NBAdan doesn't believe any of this stuff. It's just more poo to fling at the other sideline. All in the game.

That would be silly... you know, like thinking you can extend unemployment benefits with TARP money...

[ChumpDumper]

More like Random-Chump likes to put the cart before the horses...he himself has admitted to thinking that the Bush Administration failed its job to protect the homeland from Jan 01 - Sept 12, 01..That isn't a conspiracy theory.

(watch this guys)


So dan, what do you think really happened on 9/11?

[mouse]

So dan, what do you think really happened on 9/11?

Are youtube videos allowed?

[ChumpDumper]

Are youtube videos allowed?You can't use your own words?

I didn't ask what some dumbass who made a YouTube believes -- and they never have a theory either.

Post, in your own words, what you believe really happened on 9/11.