think itīs easy to explain

1.) Citizens pay taxes
2.) Governments receives.
3.) Government has to explain what the money is spent for.
4.) If the government needs money for something they donīt want to let know about, the government is in trouble.
5.) Government needs other sources.

Agree or disagree?

The term "government" is too broad of a statement.

If you had said "A cabal within the government", I would agree wholeheartedly.

Do some research on the Afghanistani drug trade, The Federal Reserve, and Peak Oil.

That should put a decent "scratch on the surface".

right you are

the list of beneficiaries knows no limit. banks, private investors, carlyle, halliburton, PNACers...

let's just fre shts and gigles limit beneficiearies to Who Got Promoted? the mind boggles at this, since the Official Explanation involves incompetence and failure to respond properly. so how the HELL does nobody's head rolll -- in fact, some of the folks right at the crux of the incompetence defense get frickin' PROMOTED. Here's some 9/11 homework -- look up each of these persons full involvement with 9/11, and then see which of them got fired, reprimanded by commisssion, or demoted.

Leidig
eberhart
Arnold
Myers
Frasca
Tenet
---

admission -- i didnt confirm the names or factsnyone care to rebut that?

bush and his handlers understand the makeup of the American mindset..

They understand that there is people in power in private/gov sector who KNOW WHAT WENT DOWN on 911

They understand that if an American thinks he is getting a raw deal or thrown under the bus or F*cked in any way he will speak up in a loud way..

mike brown from FEMA is a case in point he is speaking up and not backing down is criticle of bush he understands he was thrown to sharks under the bus he was fired

That is why you don't see anyone fired from 911 they will turn on bush armed with paperwork to prove it


Anything to add/thoughts

Hi, I watched the 2nd edition documentary on 9/11, and there were a lot of good evidence and science behind the idea that the US did this to themselves, but I don't really understand the motive? I get the general idea that it was out of greed of course, but somethings I don't get are the gold (where it went, who found it, etc.) and what are some other ways the goverment benefitted from what happened? Another thing we have to keep in mind is that war and destruction like this ALWAYS improves economy and makes money. WWII is what got us out of the Depression. So perhaps someone else can explain all of this to me. Another thing I find interesting is that there's only 4 replies for this topic when it's an extremely important factor in understanding this?? I'm not saying whether the documentary was right or wrong, I'm just looking for some solid facts that people benefitted from this outside the normal benefits a terrorist attack would cause. Thanks!

There were many motives ( on many levels ) in the planning of 9-11.
The most obvious in retrospect was the oil pipeline through Afghanistan.
Talks on this broke down with the Taliban less than 2 weeks before 9-11.
Before 9-11 there is no way support for an invasion of Afghanistan could have been procured.
9-11 happened, With the peoples support, the pipeline is near completion.
It was not really about Osama. If it was, he would be in custody.
"They" still need him. ( even if he is dead. )

The towers asbestos problem. Not a problem after 9-11.

The Gold and silver. I wonder where that ended up.

The ex-head of the FBI. Who knew too much and just happened to have his new office above the crash zone.

The SEC records, which IMHO would have implicated many high ranking officials.

There are many many more motives.

An interesting side note, do some research on the hard drives recovered from ground zero. The company doing the recovery ( of data ) was bought by whom ?

Can you say "Conflict of interest" ?

I would love to provide you with links to my research, but unfortunately the hard drive which I kept all that data on died last month. I am also starting over.
This time I WILL keep ( multiple ) backups.

How many were actually involved - what do you think? Few hundred? Some thousand?

Most recently there was an anniversary (02-27-1933) of an event that comes to my mind.
(Feel free to have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_fire)

Back then, it was also "only" a cabal within the government, too. Or at least so goes the saying.
And how many were finally accused at the Nuremberg Trials when it was over?
All others were whitewashed for "only" taking commands from above...
being the willing tools but not accepting the guilt (good people - patriots, you know).

My parents told me that everybody who took the risk to publicly disagree with that kind of patriotism was abducted by night (you may call that "extraordinary rendition") and kept locked in a secret jail called a concentration camp, preferrably outside the country.
Best case.

Sounds familiar?

Soon after the event the governmental explanation was widely accepted by the media.
There was no proof whatsoever.
But the songsheet seemed to have been distributed even before things happened.
Like the "new Pearl Harbour" thingie that has been parroted by the smart-asses almost everywhere.
The cover-up of the events continued for decades, even long after WWII.

The hypothesis of the "single, lonesome nut" Marinus van der Lubbe is still in existence.
Heard of some "lone nut" assassin stories before?

As Jim Garrison put it in the "JFK" movie: the smell of fascism is ubiquitous.
Globalized, this time.

Another songsheet I heard singing from was about 9-11 being "the true beginning of the 21st century".
What a bullshit this all is. I think, instead, the dark ages have crept back on us.

Most Corporate Conspiracy crimes fall under the heading of what they call, Spoke and Hub conspiracies. A few people know the whole deal, while there may be dozens or even hundreds of people that take orders and know just enough to do what they're supposed to - and may not even realize that what they are doing is a crime. With something as massive as 9/11, there had to be hundreds, don't you think? And a lot of those people may have serious questions about what really happened, or what role they played - I'm just guessing of course - but keep their mouths shut for fear of reprisals. Supposedly James Woolsey (neocon member, former CIA director, member of Bush's anti-terrorism task force who cooperate with municipalities) issued a gag order down the ranks of the NYFD... there are a lot of NY firefighters that heard bombs go off, but won't talk about it for fear of losing their jobs. Do you think people at NORAD or the Pentagon that played some limited role but were unaware at the time of the scale of the event are any different? Besides, unless someone was pretty high up and played a pretty big role, if they start talking about the Government being the perpetrator of 9/11 what do you think happens? Same thing as when I say it --- people call you nuts. Am I wrong? Hopefully the LC video will help put more of a dent in the American consciousness. It's tough though, there are a lot of people that would rather believe almost anything else.

The pipeline is near completion?? Say again?? Really? I was unaware they had even started on it - and as far as I know, neither UNOCAL nor any other US oil company has yet to sign on to the project... please enlighten me if I am wrong.



One other thing - yes, there were a lot of motivating factors, and also a lot of little "icing on the cake" angles, such as John O'Neil's death. Personally, I put the gold in the later category, I actually hadn't heard about the gold theft until I saw the video. There's another interesting story about three floors in the WTC that housed the FBI offices, where a bunch of evidence on some criminal cases (forgot the cases, they involve oil conpanies and politicians of course) was being stored, that were blown to bits before the buildings got destroyed. Chief of security walked through the rubble and lived to tell about it on a news program I think?? Anyway, not my point.

War. That's the motivation. Not just Afghanistan. Iraq, who knows, next Iran... The cabal JFK speaks of is interested, no not just interested - obsessed - with building up US military might, and using it to remake the Middle East. They're don't even try to hide the fact --- go to the PNAC web site and read the garbage they printed before Bush took office - the US should up its Defence Budget 20 billion a year (done), the US should restart its chemical weapons program (done ... this part is choice - they claim that since it's now possible to make biological weapons that can differenciate between races, (ie: kill only arabs??), chemical warfare can become a political tool (!!) rather than a weapon of terror.) ... The US should be capable of fighting and winning multiple wars simultaneously, etc. etc. etc. Then you look at the bottom of the page and there's Wolfowitz and Libby's name, or Cheney and Rumsfeld's name. You get the picture, right? They're nuts! And they control the US government, and they knew they would never get the support of the American people and congress to go traipsing around the Middle East invading countries. They needed an excuse. But it goes deeper than that. I think the real kicker was that you had the neocons on one side, who wanted to invade Iraq and Iran and Syria for reasons that had nothing to do with oil (they're interested in Israeli security - it's so overt yet no one talks about it for fear of sounding anti-semetic - but it's the truth, it's a part of the equation, Pearl, Wolfowitz, Abrams, Feith, they're rabid Zionists - hell even Dick Cheney is still a member of JINSA isn't he?) .... then you had the oil interests who could give a s**t about Israel, but were all for replacing those same governments (Iraq, Iran, Syria) with regimes freindly to the US so they could get their hands on the oil. Then, when someone comes up with a plan to start a War on Islamic Terrorists, and when the patsy is Osama bin Laden and you get to knock out the Taliban who are holding up construction of a pipline to boot, that's just too much motivation. Add on top of that all the icing? That defence contractors will prosper like never before? That Halliburton will mop up in Iraq? That the Bush administration can pretty much do whatever it wants? That anyone that questions their motives or actions can be shut up just by "traitor! You're giving aid to the enemy!" ? Not to mention the Patriot Act, which existed in other forms from the Regan era and there were a lot of conservative republicans that were dying to enact it long before there was a "terrorist threat"?

There's one other thing - re: a guy named Bzrezinski. I doubt he had anything to do with 9/11, but he predicted it in print just like the PNAC (the New Pearl Harbor quote in the movie) Bzrezinski was Carter's National Security Advisor. In his 1997 book 'the Grand Chessboard', Bzrezinski, like the PNAC, also advocates expanding US hegemony in the Middle East and Asia. He is most concerned however about getting American hands on Caspian basin reserverves... of course Bzrezinski is Polish - he could care less about Israel. But he says essencially what the PNAC said, that the American people will never support the kind of military pressure that will be necessary. Albiet some massive, direct, external threat. In other words, something like 9/11. Ironically, Bzrezinski is the co-author of a very famous article, an article who's title gets kicked around a lot these days. That title, that concept that Bzrezinski is credited with formulating is ..."The Clash of Civilizations". Bzrezinski also happens to be the guy who started the Russian Afgan war, that is, convinced Carter to fund the Mujahedeen in order to lure Russia into a conflict. . He admits that much himself. He is also probably the guy who hand-picked Osama bin Laden to run that war for us. Can't be sure of that, but I've got pictures of him and bin Laden checking out a machine gun on the Afghan/Pakistan border in 1980.

Odd isn't it.

Bzrezinski's Clash of Civilizations concept was used to magnify the threat from Islamic terrorist groups back in the Reagan and Bush Sr. days to justify the continuing of large defence budgets after the fall of our arch-rival the Soviet Union. Bush Jr. & co. and/or the perpetrators of 9/11 are using it again to scare the wits out of the American people into supporting all this craziness - invading countries, throwing tens of thousands of Muslims in prison sans their Habeus Corpus (sure I spelled that wrong) rights, torturing suspects (its OK to torture now - we have to prevent another 9/11!) --- Tragically, all this US aggression has made this Clash of Civilizations a reality. --- It's just unbelievable.

Most Corporate Conspiracy crimes fall under the heading of what they call, Spoke and Hub conspiracies. A few people know the whole deal, while there may be dozens or even hundreds of people that take orders and know just enough to do what they're supposed to - and may not even realize that what they are doing is a crime.

The question is: how many people are actually _driving_ this thing?
How many are convinced that even commiting crimes of that size - instantly killing thousands of innocent, unarmed citizens -
is necessary to maintain the nations interests (or what they declare these are)?

Iīd again like to compare PNAC to the 3rd Reich (the latter was once intended to last even 10 times longer):
there sure were not only few hundreds or thousands involved in some "conspiracy".

Back then finally hundreds of thousands of "good patriots" accepted orders without questions;
I guess at least 50-100 thousand really were behind the movement. But only wildly guessing here...
things were different, since there was no such thing left as "democracy" and "freedom of speech".
And there was no network that allowed people to communicate the way we do now.

A simple recipe: declare war on someone you paint on the wall and gather the sheeple behind you.
Denounce all anti-war pacifists for lacking patriotism - there you are. Easy.
Has been done before, described in detail e. g. by Hermann Göring, just another cynical player of the grand chessboard.

Every such movement has its own theorists who clearly speak out what the intentions are ("a new Pearl Harbour").

Nowadays Zbig Brzezinski sure is one of the bigger spiders in that web.
See http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/kbank...les/brzezinski/

The "Clash of Civilisations", however, is an invention by another big PNACer: Sam Huntington.
see e. g. http://www.alamut.com/subj/economics/misc/clash.html

Itīs clearly visible that all this didnīt begin with 911.
Things have been going on for years, maybe decades (some say centuries) before that.

The goal: perpetration of profitable planetary plundering under a global, fascist state.

Thanks edefault. Scary stuff for sure, I felt really queasy as I was pressing the "post" button on that long post. I wonder how secure these sites are, I wonder about the Pentagon's 'Total Information Awareness' program, about the Bush teams efforts to get Google to relinquish search info... sounds spooky and paranoid, but I really do think about that kind of stuff. But of recent, I'm actually starting to believe that maybe the truth may really come out...

You're right. I read from time to time about "Bzrezinski's Clash of Civilizations", and how Huntington is often referred to as Bzrezinski's protoge etc., and was always under the impression that they co-wrote the original article. I just looked it up. You're right, Huntington is the author of both the book and the article... My bad, also didn't realize Huntington was in the neocon camp. Jeez!!

Thanks for straightening that out for me...

The Zbig/huntington/oliver north guys have always been around, lurking in the think tanks, etc.

But it is rare that their insane schemes ever get enough of a critical mass behind them to get accomplished.

Perhaps they have had their day and are banished again to the shadows. I don't think so.