Top US military brass behind 911

[kathaksung]

Why there was no fighter to intercept the hijacked plane on 911?

Quote, "CENTCOM Sergeant Details Traitorous Stand Down Orders On 9/11
Military whistleblower comes forward with key information
Steve Watson / Infowars | September 26 2006

Alex Jones was joined on air yesterday by a former Sergeant in the United States Army named Lauro "LJ" Chavez. Chavez was stationed at MacDill AFB where he claims he witnessed unusual preparations for a potential airplane hitting the base on the morning of 9/11 and distinctly heard officers talking about a stand down. This has led him to go public in questioning the NORAD stand down and the demolition of the twin towers.

Chavez proceeded to detail the key discussions that he heard inside the bunker on the day of 9/11:

"I didn't get to see tower one hit, I was in there talking with individuals and i was tired, I'd been there since four in the morning. Then all of a sudden everybody started hustling and bustling. it was like NASA when Apollo 13 was about to crash, everybody running around, and then they put it on the big screen, CNN with the tower on fire.

Then we see the other plane come in and hit it and at that point everybody is standing up. The air force had commanders in contact with NORAD. The plane, or whatever, hit the Pentagon and then we were like 'Why aren't they scrambling jets?' We were asking, there was eight or nine people... Colonels and Lieutenant Colonels asking the Lieutenant Colonel in charge of the air force 'why isn't NORAD scrambling jets? and he said 'we received an order to stand down''. And that just perplexed everybody."

Mr Chavez did not know the Lieutenant Colonel and so does not know his name, yet if he can be identified, then we have uncovered a direct link to the stand down order. If that man or any others who were present at CENTCOM on 9/11 can be identified and made to testify under oath, then the whole cover operation could be blown. A real independent investigation would have secured this.

The entire riveting interview is freely available online at Prisonplanet.tv now. Please spread this information far and wide.

Mr Chavez has since been informed that the computer company he now works for, as information security manager, has been receiving threatening phone calls demanding his dismissal. Mr Chavez is another example of someone who is bravely putting his career, reputation and life on the line to get the truth out about the 9/11 cover up.

http://infowars.net/articles/September2006/260906Chavez.htm

[tabletaz]

great link lets hope more whistleblowers blow

[kathaksung]

Fortune made from WTC collapsing

Larry "Lucky Larry" Silverstein
by 911 inside job
Thursday Sep 7th, 2006 10:07 AM

"You've got to be lucky to make $4 Billion killing on a 6-month investment
Of $124 Million

Larry Silverstein is the New York property tycoon who purchased the entire World Trade Centre complex just 6 months prior to the 9/11 attacks. That Was the first time in its 33-year history the complex had ever changed ownership.

Mr. Silverstein's first order of business as the new owner was to change The company responsible for the security of the complex. The new security
company he hired was Securacom (now Stratasec). George W. Bush's brother, Marvin Bush, was on its board of directors, and Marvin's cousin, Wirt
Walker III, was its CEO. According to public records, not only did Securacom provide electronic security for the World Trade Center, it also covered Dulles International Airport and United Airlines - two key players in the 9/11 attacks.

The company was backed by an investment firm, the Kuwait-American Corp., also linked for many years to the Bush family. KuwAm has been linked to the
Bush family financially since the Gulf War. One of its principals and a member of the Kuwaiti royal family, Mishal Yousef Saud al Sabah, served on the board of Stratesec.

Now, consider: The members of a small cabal owned the WTC complex, controlled its electronic security, and also controlled the security not
only for one of the airlines whose aircraft were hijacked on 9/11, but the airport from which they originated.

Another little "coincidence" -- Mr. Silverstein, who made a down-payment of $124 million on this $3.2 billion complex, promptly insured it for $7
Billion. Not only that, he covered the complex against "terrorist attacks".

Following the attacks, Silverstein filed two insurance claims for the maximum amount of the policy ($7B), based on the two -- in Silverstein's
view -- separate attacks. The insurance company, Swiss Re, paid Mr. Silverstein $4.6 Billion - a princely return on a relatively paltry
investment of $124 million.

There's more. You see, the World Trade Towers were not the real estate plum we are led to believe. From an economic standpoint, the trade center -- subsidized since its inception by the NY Port Authority -- has never functioned, nor was it intended to function, unprotected in the
rough-and-tumble real estate marketplace. How could Silverstein Group have been ignorant of this?

The towers required some $200 million in renovations and improvements, most of which related to removal and replacement of building materials declared to be health hazards in the years since the towers were built. It was
well-known by the city of New York that the WTC was an asbestos bombshell.

For years, the Port Authority treated the building like an ageing dinosaur, attempting on several occasions to get permits to demolish the building for liability reasons, but being turned down due to the known asbestos problem.
Further, it was well-known the only reason the building was still standing until 9/11 was because it was too costly to dissemble the twin towers floor by floor since the Port Authority was prohibited legally from demolishing
the buildings.

The projected cost to disassemble the towers: $15 Billion. Just the scaffolding for the operation was estimated at $2.4 Billion!

In other words, the Twin Towers were condemned structures. How convenient that an unexpected "terrorist" attack demolished the buildings completely.

WTC Building 7 was a part of the WTC complex, and covered under the same insurance policy. This 47-storey steel-framed structure, which was NOT
struck by an aircraft, mysteriously collapsed 8 hours later that same day into its own footprint at freefall speed - exactly in the manner of the
Twin Towers.

How could this have happened? Mr. Silverstein gave the world the answer when he slipped up during a PBS television interview a year later, on 9/11/2002:

"I remember getting a call from the...er...fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the
fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

As anyone who knows anything about construction can tell you, "Pull" is common industry jargon for a controlled demolition.

One thing is for sure, the decision to 'pull' WTC 7 would have delighted many people. Especially because it has been reported that thousands of
sensitive files relating to some of the biggest financial scams in history - including Enron and WorldCom -- were stored in the offices of some of the building's tenants:

US Secret Service
NSA
CIA
IRS
BATF
SEC
NAIC Securities
Salomon Smith Barney
American Express Bank International
Standard Chartered Bank
Provident Financial Management
ITT Hartford Insurance Group
Federal Home Loan Bank

The Securities and Exchange Commission has not quantified the number of active cases in which substantial files were destroyed by the collapse of WTC 7. Reuters news service and the Los Angeles Times published reports estimating them at 3,000 to 4,000. They include the agency's major inquiry into the manner in which investment banks divvied up hot shares of initial public offerings during the high-tech boom. ..."Ongoing investigations at the New York SEC will be dramatically affected because so much of their
work is paper-intensive," said Max Berger of New York's Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann. "This is a disaster for these cases."

Citigroup says some information that the committee is seeking [about WorldCom] was destroyed in the Sept. 11 terror attack on the World Trade Center. Salomon had offices in 7 World Trade Center. The bank says that
back-up tapes of corporate emails from September 1998 through December 2000 were stored at the building and destroyed in the attack.

Inside WTC 7 was the US Secret Service's largest field office with more than 200 employees. "All the evidence that we stored at 7 World Trade, in all our cases, went down with the building," according to US Secret Service Special Agent David Curran.

What a neat, complete, and fortuitous turn of events was 9/11.

Incidentally, it's worth noting that one of Lucky Larry's closest friends - a person with whom it's said he speaks almost daily by phone - is none other than former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

More on that cozy little relationship later...

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/09/07/18306895.php

[kathaksung]

By common sense (to those conveniently blinded by government propaganda)

Ten bus piled up to form a tower. (each represent 10 floors of WTC) The second one to the top had a fire. Will the whole tower collapse? For common sense, the bottom eight won't be affected. Because the construction was designed to bear more weight then 100 floors of building.

Yet it collapsed like a free fall. (One demolished in 10 seconds and the other one in 10.5 seconds)

If you play building blocks and pile up a 100 floor tower. What will happen if you take away the blocks at the corner of 83th floor? (One building of WTC was hit at the corner) It will collapse to the side where one corner is missing. (Suppose everything went on as government said that fire melt the iron beam.)

Yet, the building demolished like a free fall in straight way. Beware that from the beginning when the building were hit by plane, the construction structure kept in straight way and supported the whole without any shaking.)

It was a fire getting smaller and off. Unlike other fire which got bigger and bigger because other burning material added in to help increasing fire (like a wooden house), the WTC fire got smaller and off when the fuel burned out. There was no additional burning material to join. Iron beam won't burn. So after ten to twenty minutes when the flame was off, the temperature should decline. How could the building collapse one hour later?

There were two camp fires to boil the water. One was a wood burning fire with wood continually adding in. (normal fire ) One hour later, the water boiled.
The other one was a bowl of gas as burning material. After twenty minutes, the fire was off because there was no more burning material. one hour later, what do you think of the the water? boiled or cooled?

[A Sharp Major]

Perhaps this should go to 'Critics' Corner'. Kathaksung and tabletaz shouldn't get too excited.

Lauro LJ Chavez has been exposed as a fraud or disinformation agent depending on your opinion. Ironically by 'Veterans for 9/11 Truth' where he posted his story. It's already been covered here.

http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=4417&start=0

The rest of it has been done though not with buses. Please bring something new.

[ian neal]

What I would suggest is that if critics want to 'debunk' this information, they are welcome to copy it over and start a thread and those with the interest can join you

[Stefan]

[Dogsmilk]

[A Sharp Major]

koheleth said

[blackcat]

[kathaksung]

Physicist's Letter On 911
PHYSICS To Rocky Mountain News
10-3-6

The following letter was sent by Eric Harrington, a physicist who lives in Ojai, CA, to Vincent Carroll at the Rocky Mountain News...

Dear Mr. Carrol,

I am responding to your article slandering the legitimate questions posed by numerous scientists, engineers, pilots, even international (often Republican) politicians regarding the flaws in the "official account" of 9/11.

"Let us dip our toe again into" a couple of the bogus rebuffs posed by the "experts" at Popular Mechanics.

Pop Mech- "As the fires blazed and the temperatures rose within the buildings, NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) believes, the remaining core columns (those not severed by the planes during impact) softened and buckled, transferring most of the load to the building's outer structural columns. The floors . . . began to sag from the heat, pulling those columns inward and adding to the burden on the outer columns."

Debunking: For anyone who as actually watched the WTC video's carefully, you will note that the south tower was struck near the corner, almost insuring it sustained NO damage to the central core columns. It also had by far the largest fireball produced, indicating a substantially larger portion of the fuel was burned in the initial impact and for the most part outside the building. Oddly, it was the south tower which fell first after burning for only 55 minutes, and at a point when the fires had greatly diminished.

In addition, as given by Kevin Ryan who was responsible for the thermal testing of the WTC Steel when it was certified, the samples tested for the WTC were certified to withstand a temperature of 2,000 deg for 6 hours without failing their rated load characteristics. And that is without insulation. The WTC beams were insulated. Jet fuel burns at only 1200-1300 degrees with an ideal oxygen mixture, something not indicated by the black smoke that issued from the fires. There was nothing contained within the buildings that could have raised this figure, and those that use the example of ancient furnaces that tempered steel as a argument, again, do not understand the principles involved. I suggest that if you want the truth, and wish to actually act like a journalist for a change, you broach this subject with a real expert, Mr. Ryan. I can put you in touch with him upon request.

But more important than the issue of the likelihood of the steel failure, is the FACT (not conjecture) that ALL THREE buildings collapsed into their own footprint at FREEFALL SPEED (i.e. the unimpeded acceleration of gravity). That means, drop a rock off the roof, at the moment of collapse, and the roof would hit the ground at the same time as the rock. This implies, (regardless of what happened at the fire zone) that the when the top section of the building began to fall it managed to plow through 70-80 odd floors of pristine and undamaged steel -- literally thousands of huge beams and concrete pads-- with absolutely NO RESISTANCE (i.e.. slowing of the rate of fall) WHATSOEVER. And this sir, is physically impossible and verging on the absurd, and I (a physicist), and anyone with a shred of knowledge of engineering, physics, or just plain common sense can understand that.

And there is a $1,000,000.00 cash challenge (to date unanswered) to anyone that can suggest a legitimate solution to this nagging little problem. And lastly, if the official pancake theory is correct, it lends no explanation whatsoever for why the central core of 47 HUGE beams, all connected together at numerous levels, would not be left standing like a spire as the floor connectors failed and the floors pancaked symmetrically around them. The less resistance to this collapse scenario exhibited by the building's design, the more likely the central core would remain virtually untouched. It is a paradox.

Watch the videos. Study the evidence. Talk to the experts and the scientists who simply can no longer tolerate an explanation so at odds with the physical evidence and the physical principles of the universe. And these experts I refer to are ready and willing to debate these issues with ANYONE you and your ilk choose, ANYTIME and ANYWHERE, as long as it can be videotaped for posterity.

I will not even get into the dozens of other patently absurd explanations that Popular Mechanics and other government shills and publicity hacks have posed to make the painfully obvious physical evidence at both the WTC and Pentagon fit the official fairy tale, while suppressing the numerous eyewitness accounts that disagree, but suffice to say that when "journalists" (and I use that term EXTREMELY loosely with you), continue to disparage those who simply demand the truth, and not propaganda; who examine the evidence with open minds and simply request that the investigation of this murder of 3,000 innocents be pursued with the same objectivity and forensic vigor that a common mugging would be given; they only contribute to the ignorance pervasive and growing in this country, reduce the once noble journalistic trade to nothing more than corporate propaganda machines, and deface the sacrifice of the 3000 who were murdered.

As for your contemptuous tone of which I have tried to mimic in this reply, to quote Shakespeare, "Me thinks thou dost protest too much."

Sincerely,

Eric Harrington
Ojai, Ca
http://rense.com/general73/phy.htm

[blackcat]

Amen to that Kathaksung!

To think there are * allowed on this site who post their lies supporting the spread of the official fairy tale and trying to prevent the truth getting out. It is so blatant that the buildings were demolished by pre-planted explosions.

[kathaksung]

Excerpt from article by Christopher Bollyn (MOSSAD – THE ISRAELI CONNECTION TO 9/11):

Quote: ISRAELIS FOREWARNED

On September 12, 2001, the Internet edition of The Jerusalem Post reported, "The Israeli foreign ministry has collected the names of 4,000 Israelis believed to have been in the areas of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon at the time of the attack."

Yet only one Israeli was killed at the WTC and two were reportedly killed on the "hijacked" aircraft.

Although a total of three Israeli lives were reportedly lost on 9/11, speechwriters for President George W. Bush grossly inflated the number of Israeli dead to 130 in the president's address to a joint session of Congress on September 20, 2001.

The fact that only one Israeli died at the WTC, while 4,000 Israelis were thought to have been at the scene of the attacks on 9/11 naturally led to a widespread rumor, blamed on Arabic sources, that Israelis had been forewarned to stay away that day.

"Whether this story was the origin of the rumor," Bret Stephens, the Post's editor-in-chief wrote in 2003, "I cannot say. What I can say is that there was no mistake in our reporting."

ODIGO INSTANT MESSAGES

Evidence that Israelis had been forewarned several hours before the attacks surfaced at an Israeli instant messaging service, known as Odigo. This story, clear evidence of Israeli prior knowledge, was reported only briefly in the U.S. media – and quickly forgotten.

At least two Israel-based employees of Odigo received warnings of an imminent attack in New York City more than two hours before the first plane hit the WTC. Odigo had its U.S. headquarters two blocks from the WTC. The Odigo employees, however, did not pass the warning on to the authorities in New York City, a move that could have saved thousands of lives.

Odigo has a feature called People Finder that allows users to seek out and contact others based on certain demographics, such as Israeli nationality.

Two weeks after 9/11, Alex Diamandis, Odigo's vice president, reportedly said, "It was possible that the attack warning was broadcast to other Odigo members, but the company has not received reports of other recipients of the message."

The Internet address of the sender was given to the FBI, and two months later it was reported that the FBI was still investigating the matter. There have been no media reports since.

Odigo, like many Israeli software companies, is based and has its Research and Development (R&D) center in Herzliya, Israel, the small town north of Tel Aviv, which happens to be where Mossad's headquarters are located.

[physicist]

All that asbestos blew over Brooklyn, didn't it?

That's a real time bomb ticking.

[kathaksung]

Pre-9/11 Put Options on Companies Hurt by Attack Indicates Foreknowledge

Financial transactions in the days before the attack suggest that certain individuals used foreknowledge of the attack to reap huge profits. 1 Â The evidence of insider trading includes:
Huge surges in purchases of put options on stocks of the two airlines used in the attack -- United Airlines and American Airlines
Surges in purchases of put options on stocks of reinsurance companies expected to pay out billions to cover losses from the attack -- Munich Re and the AXA Group
Surges in purchases of put options on stocks of financial services companies hurt by the attack -- Merrill Lynch & Co., and Morgan Stanley and Bank of America
Huge surge in purchases of call options of stock of a weapons manufacturer expected to gain from the attack -- Raytheon
Huge surges in purchases of 5-Year US Treasury Notes


http://911research.wtc7.net/sept11/stockputs.html

There is a graph there. Help you to understnad better.

[kathaksung]

Quote, "A former Boston Center air traffic controller has gone public on his assertion that 9/11 was an inside job and that Donald Rumsfeld and the Pentagon tracked three of the four flights from the point of their hijacking to hitting their targets. In an astounding telephone interview, Robin Hordon claims air traffic controllers have been ignored or silenced to protect the true perpetrators of 9/11.

A recording of the phone conversation was posted on Google video late yesterday by the Pilots For 9/11 Truth organization.

Hordon said that from personal experience he knew the system was always ready to immediately scramble intercepting fighters and that any reversal of that procedure would have been unprecedented and abnormal. He had also personally handled both real hijacking situations in his airspace and other emergency procedures.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5589099104255077250&q=9%2F11%3 A+Press+for+Truth&hl=en

[outsider]

[kathaksung]

[outsider]

[kathaksung]

[kathaksung]

Five Years Later: The Official Story Falls Apart
Tue, 19 Sep 2006 11:38:41 -0700
By Sander Hicks
State Department, media launch assault on 9/11 dissent

The government is getting desperate. Two major polls recently showed that a growing number of Americans doubt the official story around 9/11. On Aug. 28, the State Department responded with a direct assault against "misinformation," by publishing a statement that attacked the fringes of the 9/11 Truth Movement. A major media brouhaha immediately followed. The New York Times published a sarcastic sniff at 9/11 activism, titled "U.S. Counters 9/11 Theories Of Conspiracy" on September 2. Time magazine ran a sympathetic but dismissive review of the popular 9/11 film "Loose Change." ABC/Disney chimed in recently with a docu-drama based on the 9/11 Commission Report.

But not everyone is going along with the program. In New York City, the Sept. 1 edition of AM New York did a positive front-page overview of the 9/11 Truth Movement's claims. In August, Seattle's Post-Intelligencer did the same. Even the heads of the 9/11 Commission, widely criticized as too close to the government they were tasked to investigate, recently released a new book that admits they were pre-destined to fail. Popular Mechanics has turned their anti-conspiracy theory feature "9/11: Debunking the Myths" into a book. Five-time Emmy award winning journalist Peter Lance just wrote Triple Cross about the funky CIA connections of bin Laden's right-hand man, Ali Mohamed. Triple was turned into a documentary at the National Geographic TV channel, but before it was broadcast Aug. 28, Lance removed his name from the film. "They hijacked my work," he told reporters, "The feds have gotten to them, there is no doubt."

Author Mike Ruppert has sold 30,000 copies of Crossing the Rubicon, a study of 9/11, but after his offices were repeatedly burglarized, he expatriated himself to Venezuela, swearing never to return to the U.S. On Aug. 16, the anti-Zionist, right-leaning journalist and 9/11 researcher Christopher Bollyn was arrested and bloodied by Chicago police, for asking them why three men in an unmarked car were monitoring his house. Bill O'Reilly bent to a new (and criminal) low this summer by making death threats against Kevin Barrett, professor and co-founder of 9/11 Scholars for Truth.

The censorship and the violence come from the same place: an intense desperation. America is out on a limb in Iraq. We are there, in part, in the name of an attack used to motivate us for war. But five years later, that attack gives people gnawing feelings of betrayal. America is writhing in the birth pangs of a new way to see itself. The State Department and media are holding their hands up in front of a tsunami. People are beginning to reject the deathly falsity of the war in Iraq and the "war on terror." Who knows how this will translate in the mid-term elections, but pro-impeachment progressives and third party candidates stand to gain big.

A Zogby poll from this summer shows mainstream opinion 42 percent against the official story, claiming deliberate cover-up. Ten percent are undecided. According to a widely-cited August 14 poll by Ohio University and Scripps Howard News Service, 36 percent of Americans believe U.S. government officials "either assisted in the 9/11 attacks or took no action to stop the attacks because they wanted to go to war in the Middle East." Something is not right with 9/11. It was never right: from the president's non-response on Sept. 11, 2001, to the GOP abuse of New York City for their convention, to the president's recently announced plans to visit Ground Zero this Sept. 11, five years later.

When he arrives, he will meet the 9/11 Truth Movement. They are a nationwide batch of volunteers willing to risk their own skins to hunt down better explanations. The World Trade Center towers were symbolic of the grandeur, glory, and showmanship of New York and America. Their destruction, no matter who did it, was the biggest psychological blow to our collective psyche. Losing the towers shattered the anchor of the New York skyline. In the same way that no New Yorker can look at the city without seeing a gap, no American has been allowed to feel safe, secure, respected, or just, good and right, since. We have become torturers. We have become war-mongerers.

The undecided among us perhaps have not yet begun to recognize and heal the psychological trauma of 9/11. Instead, the media images have been burned into our brains, a reminder of the original experience. Last year, I toured the country speaking about 9/11. More often than not I met people who said things like, "you're right, all you say, but I'm just not ready to go there yet."

The facts are not enough. This is not just an intellectual struggle, last year, it became apparent something really deep is going on.

So, a year later, what changed? Katrina and the quagmire in Iraq have damaged the Bush team's credibility beyond recognition. When people saw Bush letting black people die in New Orleans, on television, a lot of people did a gut check. And now that Team Bush won't revise its Iraq strategy in light of the Pentagon's own assessments, and instead starts implying that Iran or Syria is next, people are going, hold on a minute. Meanwhile, you've got technology like Google Video virally distributing films like "Loose Change II" into the hands of millions worldwide. You've got 9/11 truth activists, working in every major city in America. You've got new veterans from the financial and intelligence underworlds coming forth and saying, yeah, 9/11 was an inside job. Even former Bush official Morgan Reynolds and former Reagan official Paul Craig Roberts agree: 9/11 is a big lie.

http://www.gnn.tv/articles/2558/Five_Years_Later_The_Official_Story_Fa lls_Apart

[kathaksung]

WTC photo shows there were people alive at the hole the plane crashed at. The heat was not high as government told you. It cooled off after the fire was off. Click URL to see the picture.

Quote, "Now let's look at a close-up of damage to the WTC 1. It might be hot enough for a weenie roast, but not a towering inferno capable of weakening the integrity of the steel structure. Do you see the man near the right edge looking out between the pillars? On the next floor down on the left, do you see the woman leaning out for a look? Do you think they just walked through a blazing inferno to get there? In case you are thinking that the images have been doctored and the survivors added with Photoshop, the picture of the woman actually appears in the FEMA report (page 18 of Chapter 2: WTC 1 and WTC 2

http://www.the7thfire.com/9-11/World_Trade_Center/no_towering_inferno. htm

[kathaksung]

Coincidence? The loss always beared by ordinary people, not the top ranking officials.

7. More than an hour and fifteen minutes after the first hijacking was reported by FAA, the US military headquarters at the Pentagon was struck without any defensive action taken to stop the attack. The impact was on the west side, for some reason the only side that had been "hardened" with blast-proof windows and specially reinforced walls. None of the highest ranking military leadership were located on that side.

http://www.masoncontractors.org/newsandevents/masonryheadlines/headlin e.php?id=20020809080000

[frankverismo]

As this thread seems to be a general discussion, it may be a good place to share the following with you. On several occasions that I have tried to share this information, it has resulted in entire articles, threads and comments disappearing from those sites. It is information which gets to the very heart of this whole sorry mess - lying as it does at the very foundation of this great dung-heap of lies we are forced to endure.

'America' is a country. The 'United States' is not a country. It is a corporation. This is not 'hyperbole' or 'metaphor' - it is a fact:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode28/usc_sec_28_00003002----000- .html
Scroll to the bottom of the page at the link above. It is the actual US Code law definition of the 'United States'. It is defined as a 'federal corporation' and is about as 'federal' as the Federal Reserve. US Code law itself is 'International Private Law' - that is, the law of private international banking cartels. This should come as no surprise, as the corporation known as the 'United States' was established by international bankers.

This corporation - the 'United States' was granted its charter in February of 1871 by the forty-first Congress, still reeling from the ruinous Civil War and the assassination of Lincoln. It came into being through the 'Act To Provide A Government for the District of Columbia', Forty-First Congress, Section 34, Session III, chapters 61 and 62.

What has this got to do with 9/11? Everything. It is the explanation for every war America has been dragged into through deception since the end of the 19th century. Ask yourself - does the US behave like a constitutional republic - or like a rapacious corporation? This corporation is the blood-sucking parasite masquerading as legitimate government. In reality, its legal reach extends no further than the ten square miles constituting the District of Columbia. Through a long process of coercion, propaganda and the use of attack dogs (the 'abc' agencies) the American people have falsely been led to believe that the law of D.C. is the law of the land. It is not. Systematically, they have been robbed of the fruits of their labour (through illegal taxation), had their sovereignty undermined (through illegal trade agreements) and had their blood and treasure sucked out of their country by an endless succession of wars built on fear-inducing lies.

When a young man or woman signs up for the military, they do so in the noble belief they will be fighting for their country. But they won't be. They'll be fighting for the corporation, as muscle for yet another hostile takeover (that's what the Iraq invasion is). As monstrous a deception as 9/11 was, it is nothing compared to the size of the overall picture - the mother of all lies.

Corporate government - according to Mussolini's own definition - is fascism. It is also utterly forbidden by a Constitution that guarantees a republican form of government. There are 300 million people in America who, for the moment, hold all the legal cards here. They just don't know it yet.

America=host body. 'United States' corporation=parasite.

There is a great deal more to say on this subject, but for the moment - if this is new to you - please let the magnitude of the issue sink in. Exposing 9/11 will result in some greatly deserved jail sentences. But exposing this issue will result in the end of the Global Agenda - and a World worth living in.

[kathaksung]

I have a similar theory.

Hound

Human have hound in their house to protect their family against the wolf. As the hound getting more power, they don't want to be guard any more. They want to be master. So the hound trained some wolf they captured. Let these agent wolf to attack and kill human. Human is frightened. They give hound whatever they wanted, equipment, power ..... Now hound become master. When they need something, they let the agent wolf have an attack on human, then said, this is a long war, to protect your lives, I need warrantless surveillance, more budget, torture prison.... . The hound repeated its demand, "This enemy has struck us, and they want to strike us again, and we'll give our folks the tools necessary to protect the country," if you don't then the hound "can not protect ourselves".

That's why we saw after 5 years, occasionally a wolf or two were captured. But hundreds of thousands of innocent people died. There is an endless war to control people. A constant blackmail for more power. If Chavez says it's devil, he may say truth.

The Al Qaida of Iraq is an agent wolf of US and Israel intelligence. It works to provoke the racial conflict in Iraq. So US troops can stay in Mid-East until next war breaking off.

[utopiated]

[Craig W]

[Craig W]

http://www.e-thepeople.org/article/39029/view?viewtype=best&skip=10

An interesting review of a book called "THE CONSTITUTION: FACT OR FICTION"

The authors claim that the Constitution has in effect been suspended since 1933 when F D Roosevelt declared a national emergency. This was never revoked, they say, and they quote a Senate Report of 1973 stating that since then "the US has been in a state of declared national emergency".

During this time hundreds of Executive Orders have increased the President's emergency powers enormously.

They say that, once authorised, the dictatorial situation can only be ended by the President himself declaring it over. None has yet done so.

[Skeptic]

Re: the earlier questions

As far as I know, the WTC was insured for $3.6 Billion - so that would have been $7.2 Billion for two claims, but he receieved less - around 5 Billion (?)

Also, I believe the WTC insurance documents weren't entirely finalised on 9/11 - hence the massive dispute in court afterwards

This is a matter I have found it very hard to get solid information about, I will post a list of articles as soon as I get home

peace

[kathaksung]

Bush asks Daschle to limit Sept. 11 probes
January 29, 2002 Posted: 9:26 PM EST (0226 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush personally asked Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle Tuesday to limit the congressional investigation into the events of September 11, congressional and White House sources told CNN.

Tuesday's discussion followed a rare call to Daschle from Vice President Dick Cheney last Friday to make the same request.

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/01/29/inv.terror.probe/