911, Iraq, PNAC , All roads lead to Israel

[Ry]

A quick list of what really happened on 911 by Ryan Dawson of (anti-neocons.com)

The Mossad was sure trying hard to set up these Muslims. They went out partying at a strip club and even left a drivers license. They left a bag full of goodies and to top the cake claimed to find Atta's passport near ground Zero lol. That was a way of getting credit without consequence. Anyone with half a brain knows they did it yet the media doesn't dare do a thing. Its like they tagged the act because they knew they would get away with it anyway. Later they mailed those silly Anthrax letters with the stolen Anthrax via Dr Zack.

All the Iraq war cabal liars are in the DOD working for people with prior histories of spying for Israel and they just so happen to be authors of PNAC papers which blatantly state the desire to go to war with Iraq and Afghanistan and the need for a new Pearl Harbor like attack.

THEN they get bust is not one but three spyrings for Israel, the Art students (the largest spy ring EVER in US history) the Naval Spy now in jail on a guilty plea, and the AIPAC spy ring which has yet to see a trial but We caught them on tape and one of Feith's underlings Larry Franklin is already in Jail.

THEN we got Libby and that whole mess peddling known fake news in the media and leaking information about the CIA to help cover up the lies of the OSP and the crooked actions of the ATC a lobby group comprised of AIPAC members which lobby for the MIC.

Oh but that is not all we look at the put options and profiteering and it leads right back to the CIA and the Mossad. I mean WTF that should have ended it right there.

THEN look at the mess with Perle and Kissinger setting up Trireme Inc investing in it with Holliger which they sit on the BOD of along with 911 commission member James R. Thompson ha ha who just so happened to work for not only Hollinger but Winston & Strawn LLP a law firm that lobbies for American Airlines!!

And you got Douglas Feith and Marc Zell getting to distribute money for Iraq's contracts (mostly non-bid) through their Feith and Zell Israeli law firm. And each contract comes with its own sad story and leads right back to Cheney and his little Zionist cabal in the DOD and in the office of the Vice President.

THEN look at the scandals too many to even name but I have it listed on the Neocon scum list section of this site.

OK throw all that together now with the dancing Israelis, the so called hijackers found to be alive and spotted in two places at once multiple times thus proving they had doubles, Atta being on Abramoff's casino ship and living NEXT DOOR TO THE MOSSAD, He was Mossad because it was not really Atta.

That's not all and I went over in detail here. I also made a film about it which is in our best of section. And I went on the WRH show to talk about that as well as a few other radio programs.

The Sibel case (seen in our video section) and the AIPAC case (I been over a lot on the radio) just flag more and more parts of the MIC and every stone you look under is a Zionist you can recognize by name.

[Ry]

To all the morons from digg making comments about the "Joos"

It is not a conspiracy against Jews you idiots. Israel is a Nation just like Russia the UK or any other nation and it is just as cabable of attacks as the CIA or the KGB or MI6. Israel was involved in the 911 attacks and the deceptions that led to a war with Iraq and that is a fact. Do not try an turn this into some racial or Religious BS. That is a total strawman and you know it.

[mike_ca]

I have a fifth theory which unifies the war in Iraq with the cabal that planned 911.

From all that I've read, MANY of the real 911 truthers also have that theory, and have had for some year[s] already; some or many as of at least three years ago. So I guess it depends on who we read, what sources we use.

And I think there're are more than only the wars on Afghanistan, or Central Asia if you prefer, given it is targeted in broader terms than only Afghanistan, and on Iraq. It's not WoT, but GWoT, and the 'o' is not 'on' but 'OF', for that is all GWoT is, 'OF terrorism' or 'OF state terrorism', and worse.

It all seems to really be, if not simply really all [is], a global war OF terrorism, extreme war of aggression and most certainly geopolitical, while it's all for basically domination of the world's economy when it comes to, minimally, natural resources. I think, therefore, that in the GWoT we can include the wars in Sudan or Darfur region and Somalia, as well as possibly other Africa countries where the U.S. superpower is instrumentally serving either or both directly and/or by getting very criminal proxy govts of Africa to carry out the dirty work.

Economic domination and profiteering from it is pretty much the whole history of the U.S. covert and less covert operations around the world. It is in South America, Africa, and surely most or all other places where the U.S. serves as a powerful instrument for the controlling "power elites" to try to achieve their hellishly corrupt objectives. Like former USMC Smedley Butler wrote, 'WAR IS A RACKET', and he surely was not mistake about this.

To some degree anyway, I think that we can consider more than only Afghanistan and Iraq as unified "with the cabal that planned 911". If we have war on Iran, then this will most likely if not certainly be also part of this unification theory.

[Ry]

I have had the theory from the start. Only my websites were all deleted in 2005 without a reason. AOL erased my entire name not just my sites and myspace erased me 5 times in one month.

and yes it is a global war OF terrorism with the US the UK and Israel doing what they have always done.

[mike_ca]

I have had the theory from the start.

From the start, like as of 9-11, or as of fall 2002 or early 2003, say? I wouldn't have guessed around 9-11, given I hadn't yet heard or read anything about Iraq being accused or targeted, to any degree. But as of Fall 2002, it was obvious that the war could not be justified, with or without UN weapons inspections. We didn't need those to know the answer was 'NO' to the idea of war on or with Iraq.

When we realise something that clearly and strongly, then it's also obvious that the war is for unstated reasons, and then it's easy enough to figure out what the possibilities and likelihoods are.

Just like the war on Afghanistan was obviously one that could not be justified and on the simple basis that Bush said, and before launching the war on the Taliban, which he made adequately if not totally clear was going to be against them, well, he clearly told the whole world that they had had NOTHING to do with the 9-11 attacks. So we could immediately realise that the war was being commanded for OTHER reasons, that these were not stated, and the war would be aggression, which is criminal. So it's then time to seek what the hidden reasons may be. I couldn't then do that, given that I didn't have access to a PC, so much less Internet, from 2000 to spring 2002; but was able to pick up what Bush told the whole world over tv broadcasts. Usama Bin Ladin and Al Qaeda, which Bush had said only had relations with the Taliban govt, were not justification for war on that govt.

After all, to think otherwise is to think in hegemonic and hypocritical terms, and that's criminal; while all of this is just to say the least of what it all is, it's the elementary part.

It's simple. All we need to be is against war unless absolutely necessary for DEFENCE, strictly. There was no question of credible defence of the U.S. vis-a-vis either the Taliban or Saddam Hussein's govts. The UN weapons inspections worked greatly, and we had the recent enough U.S. and NATO gangster war on former President Slobodan Milosevic and the Kosovo area to keep in mind.

I don't think I've heard of whether or not the UNSC had authorized the war on the Taliban until very recently, and which said the answer is negative; no authorization. It's very odd that this is VERY RARELY said; and this is disappointing.

Given that France, Russia and some other countries with states that are members of the UNSC voted against war on Iraq, I guess these countries had populations that were majoritively against the war. Perhaps that was also true with respect to war on the Taliban, too; if what I read about the UNSC not having authorized this war is true.

I tried to find the answer to that question with the UN's website, but wasn't successful; and there should be a website that shows the ways in which the UNSC has voted. We should be able to look up this sort of information very easily.

Only my websites were all deleted in 2005 without a reason. AOL erased my entire name not just my sites and myspace erased me 5 times in one month.

OUCH. I have never heard or read any good about AOL, but it did seem to have a lot of users. As for myspace, was Murdoch owner when your files were erased there? I would expect that that warmonger and pro-fascist and -corporatist owning myspace would mean that he does direct censorship, to some extent anyway.

It's interesting to read his profile there; coming right out and acknowledging or professing that he is these ways and wants to be; although am not sure to recall if he mentioned the warmonger part. I think the profile made 'warmonger' clear enough, if it's not explicitly stated by him.

and yes it is a global war OF terrorism with the US the UK and Israel doing what they have always done.

Yep, and I haven't read the article yet, but there's a recent one that says that the France-Belgium OIL consortium or corporation, Total or TotalElf, how ever it is called, is now getting in on this "game". This is according to EINNews.com anyway; but I can't access the article, given a free-trial subscription requires a credit card and I don't have one. The following Web search produced links to two EINNews articles for me; one of Aug. 9th and the other of Aug. 8th, according to the list of search results anyway.

Google.ca

If by the time people trying that search link it doesn't produce the two EINNews links, then maybe changing "Total and Chevron" to "Total, Chevron" will do the "trick". The search results listing had the latter as part of either the article's text, or the title.

I'd like to read the piece but haven't the means. It'd be good to know if these are already agreed contracts and if so, then who authorized these; etc. Sarkozy can't keep his greedy hands of Iraqis' oil; has to join "The Boys".

"The Boys", I say; where did I get that? From the account provided by Kay Griggs and about her very short-term marriage with some U.S. military colonel who was assassin and trained others to be assassins for "The Boys". You've surely heard of this story, while I've only been able to read some articles about it; and for readers not aware of the story, then a Web search simply using her name turns up plenty of links, while the 7.5-hour interview with some pirate radio priest in the U.S. is or was available at http://www.KayGriggsTalks.com .

Kay Griggs was a Southern divorcee who rented a room to Marine Corps colonel George Griggs in the late 1980s. She was impressed by his clipped manner, his education, his good looks. Two months later she married him. What she found out about world affairs as George Griggs' wife was astounding.

Colonel Griggs was a Marine Corps Chief of Staff, as well as head of NATO's Psychological Operations. He was also, his wife realized, entirely mind-controlled. Kay, a self-declared Christian, became privy to the real workings of the United States military, leadership training, drug-running and weapons sales, and the secret worldwide camps that train professional assassins.

These interviews with Pastor Rick Strawcutter of Adrian, Michigan were conducted in 1998, .... Kay Griggs' report of world events and the power elite paints a picture that begins to explain the hows and whys of our current global scenario.

Quotes from Kay Griggs:

"They took with them the most perverted aspects of Nazi Germany and brought them over to the United States."

"They get rid of the good guys. The Marine Corps are the assassins for the Mob. The military is run by the Mob. The military IS the Mob."

"He told me what they did. They nurture -- they cultivate -- the sons of prominent families. They're called "rising stars." They rope them in. Then they "turn" them."

ON ASSASSINS: "What my husband does for a living is train mercenaries -- young boys from countries like Romania, Dominican Republic, Haiti. They're training them to be murderers, and the taxpayers' dollars are paying for this. They psychologically profile them. The profile is similar to my husband's and Lee Harvey Oswald's and [Timothy] McVeigh's, and others who were all part of this program. Jeffrey Dahmer was part of this program. They're all Army. They were all picked out because they were perverted or twisted. [The military profiles for] strong mother, weak father, no father, poor. Because these guys are looking for security, so they will stay in the military and do anything for that security." (Interviews, Disk 1)

...

By 'Mob', and from I've read in articles, or elsewhere at KGT, she's not speaking of the Cosa Nostra Mafia; if recalling correctly.

Anyway, do you have input on that? Some of the 'ON ASSASSINS' part above strikes me as likely enough, but while some also seems like maybe she's exaggerating or not wholly sure of what she's talking about and therefore speculating based on only what she thinks or imagines; something like that anyway.

What's said in the rest of the page strikes me as fine and important information from her, but ... as per just above, on that one part.

It's such a rarely mentioned topic that this causes me to wonder about the veracity of it; yet it sure seems like it's probably true, for the most part anyway. People who believe what she says should have no difficulty in realizing that 9-11, and minimally, most likely was 'inside job'; far more likely than not.

Some Nova Scotian studying at a local university told me not long ago that she had heard that Kay Griggs had been charged with some crime, prosecuted and convicted, but there's no mention of this at KGT.

KG is oddly not censored at myspace; or I think it's odd, anyway. I've read of enough people who strike me as writing well on GWoT matters and who've been also censored at myspace, so am a little surprised about her. It's only her profile though and maybe these normally aren't removed (?). I don't know; not be a user of myspace, and disliking it, "plain and simple".

[mike_ca]

Actually, here's the article which I had bookmarked and should have checked for before the last post, and on FRANCO-BELGIAN OIL CONGLOMERATE 'TOTAL' OR 'TOTALELF' getting in on the OIL thievery "game" of the U.S. in Iraq.

"US and French Oil Conglomerates Share the Spoils of War", San Francisco Chronicle, Aug. 9, 2007,

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php? ... a&aid=6495

[Ry]

sart as in a little before 911 because I was already working for Palestinian solidarty and I saw who sold short and had already read the PNAC papers so as soon as it happened I knew who did it. But at the time I only had an AOL website and I had never heard of WRH or Alex Jones or any of that. KUCI radio did an interview with me few years ago before I had things up on this site and I went over 911 there and Libby etc. That was october 05 the reason I was on the show was because the host had been one of my readersd on myspace I actually started the 911 truth group there from anti-neocnos but my groups were erased and Taylor took it over you can ask him about it.

I was and still am not a "computer guy" I did do radio shows wrote a book started groups in college talked on the news and run this site but mostly I was behind internetwise at getting the message out because I simply didn't know how or where to promote things.

[mike_ca]

Yep, myspace sure is NO place to make "home" on the Web. As much as your group(s) got wiped out, and what I read about others who strike me as people providing goood input also had their content removed, I don't know why people would want to use the website. I already disliked it very much because it works very LOUSY with my Web browser and takes a long time to load, when it did load; but people providing good input and that getting wiped out is outright censorship. Anyway, I've never been a user of myspace because it's a lousy website service for me; only came across a few links to articles there.

It might be easier for people like you to get more quickly known in such websites, but I think having your own like this one, here, and the same applies to Aaron's discussion forum, this is better; imo anyway. It's my preferrence as a user.

You have fair enough traffic, people who post, and that's all Aaron's forum lacks; users who post. Once you have enough who participate, then it's a question of enough of the users doing enough reading elsewhere for cross-posting links to and/or copies of qualitative articles.

Intuition is another consideration; it's intuitively better to have one's own website, when a person can. People who really can't just can't, but if we can, then the owner is the one who decides what content is acceptable or not; the owner's the boss over the website. And we know that a lot of people are prone to censorship, for a lot of websites practice this and while I'm speaking of qualitative and important articles to suggest people read.

And I intuitively wouldn't want to use a website owned by warmonger and pro-fascist and -corporatist Murdoch. I don't know when he bought out myspace, but came across an article this past week about him having now bought out WSJ, Wall Street Journal, either directly, or maybe because of Dow Jones; something like that anyway. This sort of crap business "wheeling and dealing" should be stopped dead in its tracks.

BTW, who's the guy in the avatar image associated with this post, the "Stop the money changers" avatar? I didn't select any avatar, not even having thought about it, but "stop the money changers" sounds like it should be fitting.

[Ry]

Oh I ha a separate site on AOL tat was there since 2001 that got wiped out in 2005 when I predicted the 7/7 bombing.


We have the truth. I dont know what people are waiting for. Do you really need the News or some talking head to make it "official" by saying yes 911 was a false flag operation on TV? It is NOT going to happen.

[mike_ca]

...

We have the truth. I dont know what people are waiting for. Do you really need the News or some talking head to make it "official" by saying yes 911 was a false flag operation on TV? It is NOT going to happen.

I don't need any of that, but "what people are waiting for" is something I can't answer. Some are aware but just won't get involved in any of these matters, they won't join activist groups, etc., and just hope that things will somehow be worked out the way is needed, or, else, we're all going down and it's just a time of swimming or sinking on an individual basis.

Other people don't have the character to get involved, and while yet others don't want to consider that their govt could possibly be guilty of committing flase flag terrorism and on their own nation. Etc.

I read an article some time back and the author, who I thought was Howard Zinn, but maybe not, well, he said that it's been a historical generality for populations to be split in three ways. Around 1/3 will be the pro-warmonger, -fascist, etc., segment of the population. Another 1/3 will be the activists variably but all trying to contribute to stopping the former. And the remaining 1/3 are often aware of the pro-warmonger, etc., wrongs but don't care, thinking only of themselves. The latter won't particularly side with either of the other two 1/3 segments, so 2/3; only thinking of themselves.

The article said that this is the general way populations have historically been, and I'm no historian and have never read this from anyone else.

We might be lacking details pertaining to the whole truth, but we have enough of it to be able to know what needs to be done and which should have been done several years ago.