[Vision2020] The Power Hour "Libertarian" Radio Show PromotesClaim of 9/11 Cover-up[
Ted Moffett
starbliss at gmail.com
Tue Mar 16 17:01:38 PDT 2010
I am not saying President W. Bush deliberately allowed 9/11 to happen,
except insofar as he was incompetent. And the historical facts in my post
are accurate. Name one fact in the post you responded to that is not well
verified.
*If, and I emphasize if*, there was any deliberate intentional malfeasance
among agents of the US to exploit a pending terror attack against the US to
promote the agenda of the "Project for the New American Century" (Cheney and
Rumsfeld supported this project) which is rather explicit in documents
noting that a "new Pearl Harbor" would provide the justification for an
expansion of US military hegemony, President W. Bush would likely have been
a figure head, not a planner of such malfeasance, and likely kept out of the
loop.
Some think that Cheney was more president, in reality, than Bush during his
presidency.
------------------------------------------
Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 11:26 AM, lfalen <lfalen at turbonet.com> wrote:
> Your history is distorted. Bush did not allow 9/11 to happen anymore than
> FDR allowed Pearl Harbor to happen( I am not a fan of either). On Pearl
> Harbor the Japanese code was broken and a message was sent out. Neither FDR
> or the military higher ups received it.
> Roger
> -----Original message-----
> From: Ted Moffett starbliss at gmail.com
> Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2010 13:33:05 -0700
> To: Paul Rumelhart godshatter at yahoo.com
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] The Power Hour "Libertarian" Radio Show
> PromotesClaim of 9/11 Cover-up[
>
> > President Bush's August briefing before 9/11 explicitly stated "Bin Laden
> > determined to strike in US."
> >
> > I question the theory that the 9/11 attacks and the collapse of the
> > buildings involved was orchestrated by agents of the US. But the theory
> > that 9/11 was "allowed" to happen, that there was substantial evidence
> that
> > terrorists were going to strike the US, but the aggressive actions
> required
> > to stop the attack were deliberately avoided, is possible, given that the
> > neo-con "Project for the New American Century" explicitly stated in
> military
> > think tank analysis prior to 9/11 ("Rebuilding America's Defenses:
> Strategy,
> > Forces and Resources for a New Century" September 2000:
> > http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf ),
> that a
> > "new Pearl Harbor" would provide the justification for the expansion of
> US
> > military power into the Middle East and elsewhere.
> >
> > At best, the fact that more aggressive steps were not taken to stop the
> 9/11
> > attacks, reveals gross incompetence, if not a deliberate conspiracy to
> > exploit a major terror attack against the US as a "new Pearl Harbor" to
> > expand US military/economic hegemony. Cheney and Rumsfeld signed the
> > "Statement of Principles" for the "Project for the New American Century"
> in
> > 1997 ( http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm ).
> It is
> > no surprise they assumed positions of great power in the second Bush
> > administration, given the agenda to expand US military/economic hegemony
> was
> > planned well in advance, if they could gain the White House back.
> >
> > I won't continue a history lesson here (the two websites below offer a
> > critical analysis of 9/11 orthodoxy). But there are very serious
> questions
> > that can be raised regarding why more aggressive steps were not taken to
> > stop the 9/11 plot, given the information we know the US government
> > possessed regarding the plans for a terror attack on the US, who might
> carry
> > out such an attack, and that use of commercial aircraft as terror weapons
> > was known prior to 9/11 as a likely method. Bush administration national
> > security advisor Condoleeza Rice was either woefully uninformed, which I
> > doubt given her intelligence, or engaging in "spin" propaganda to hide
> the
> > tracks of Bush administration failures regarding the 9/11 attacks, when
> she
> > made the statements quoted from the second website below:
> >
> > http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO405E.html
> >
> > ---------------------
> >
> http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?the_post-9/11_world=denials&timeline=complete_911_timeline
> >
> > >From website immediately above:
> > May 16, 2002: Nobody Predicted 9/11-Style Attacks, Says Condoleezza
> > Rice<
> http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a051602rice#a051602rice>
> > [image: Edit event]<
> http://www.historycommons.org/eventedit.jsp?oid=1626004942-36209&drafts=null&timeline=complete_911_timeline
> >
> >
> >
> > [image: National Security Adviser Rice tries to explain what Bush knew
> and
> > when in her May 16, 2002 press conference.]National Security Adviser Rice
> > tries to explain what Bush knew and when in her May 16, 2002 press
> > conference. *[Source: CNN]*National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice
> > states, “I don’t think anybody could have predicted that these people
> would
> > take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center, take another
> one
> > and slam it into the Pentagon, that they would try to use an airplane as
> a
> > missile,” adding that “even in retrospect” there was “nothing” to suggest
> > that. [White House,
> > 5/16/2002<
> http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/05/20020516-13.html
> >
> > ] Contradicting Rice’s claims, former CIA Deputy Director John Gannon
> > acknowledges that such a scenario has long been taken seriously by US
> > intelligence: “If you ask anybody could terrorists convert a plane into a
> > missile? [N]obody would have ruled that out.” Rice also states, “The
> > overwhelming bulk of the evidence was that this was an attack that was
> > likely to take place overseas.” [MSNBC, 5/17/2002] Slate awards Rice the
> > “Whopper of the Week” when the title of Bush’s August 6 briefing is
> > revealed: “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US.” [Slate,
> > 5/23/2002<http://slate.msn.com/?id=2066154>
> > ] Rice later will concede that “somebody did imagine it” but will say she
> > did not know about such intelligence until well after this conference.
> > [Associated
> > Press, 9/21/2002]
> > ------------------------------------------
> >
> > Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett
> > On 3/14/10, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Trust, once lost, takes a lot of work to get back. When you have the
> U.S.
> > > government arming Osama and the CIA enabling drug trafficking for the
> > > Contras, it's not a big stretch to wonder if they had any involvement
> in
> > > 9/11. There are enough strange things surrounding 9/11 that I would
> not be
> > > surprised to find the government was involved.
> > >
> > > The reason I obey traffic laws has more to do with safety than trust of
> the
> > > government. Generally, the system works well enough that you can at
> least
> > > have some faith in a contract, and some hope the police will respond if
> you
> > > call them. I wouldn't want to be the guy that happened across some
> > > confidential documents or saw the wrong thing go down at the wrong
> time,
> > > though.
> > >
> > > Paul
> > >
> > > Wayne Price wrote:
> > >
> > >> Ted, et al,
> > >>
> > >> One has to ask, or at least I do, why would people put any faith in
> these
> > >> wild stories? While, I don't agree with 9/11 being an inside job,
> there is
> > >> a general distrust of ALL levels of government that just
> > >> feed into things like this. And not just on the national level, but
> more
> > >> importantly at the local levels as well. For instance, does anyone
> living in
> > >> Northern Idaho really think the "boys in Boise" even care about North
> > >> Idaho?
> > >> If they feel that way, why? Does anyone trust an employment contract
> or
> > >> retirement contract with the U of I? If not, why? Can you trust that
> the
> > >> speed limits on our county roads are legitimate? If not, why?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Distrust of "government",once it starts, is hard to turn around and I
> > >> believe that in America, we have a long long way to go. Perceptions,
> good or
> > >> bad are real, even though they may not be true. And it is in the light
> of
> > >> those perceptions that people live, not in light of the truth or
> falsity of
> > >> an issue.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> On Mar 13, 2010, at 4:42 PM, Ted Moffett wrote:
> > >>
> > >> There are a lot of "conservatives" who believe in a government
> cover-up
> > >>> regarding the facts of 9/11.
> > >>> There is a radio show that has a large following that has been on
> the
> > >>> air for years, that I have listened to numerous times on shortwave,
> that is
> > >>> very political but in some ways hard to stereotype. I suppose you
> could
> > >>> call it hard core libertarian (they passionately promoted Ron Paul's
> > >>> presidential bid), which means that it is very distrustful of
> government in
> > >>> a consistent aggressive way that many traditional "mainstream"
> conservatives
> > >>> are not. Anti-abortion views are expressed, which fits the current
> > >>> Republican agenda, but there are two issues that have received a lot
> of air
> > >>> time where the show has argued for government cover-ups, Gulf War
> Syndrome
> > >>> among vets, and 9/11. This show aggressively attacked the Bush
> > >>> administration, and is doing the same to Obama's. Main website for
> this
> > >>> radio show:
> > >>> http://www.thepowerhour.com/
> > >>> ---------------------------------------------
> > >>> The following documentary described at the website below, promoted by
> > >>> "The Power Hour," pulls no punches regarding what it claims was "a
> massive
> > >>> cover-up" regarding 9/11:
> > >>> http://www.thepowermall.com/
> > >>> *911 In Plane Site
> > >>>
> > >>> *New* "The Directors Cut" *with *"More Footage - More Photographs -
> More
> > >>> Evidence" *
> > >>>
> > >>> *PRODUCER: Dave vonKleist*
> > >>> DIRECTOR: William Lewis
> > >>>
> > >>> Due to the overwhelming response of "911 In Plane Site," we were able
> to
> > >>> collect mountains of new footage and photographs from sources all
> over the
> > >>> world. We can now say, without a shadow of doubt, that we have
> undeniable
> > >>> evidence of a massive cover-up. From the 16 ft. hole in the outer
> walls of
> > >>> the Pentagon to the news reports of bombs, explosions and potential
> > >>> demolition of World Trade Centers 1, 2 and 7, to the strange
> attachment on
> > >>> the bottom of Flight 175 and the mysterious flashes caught on
> videotape by
> > >>> at least five separate sources, it is clear - 911 was an inside job.
> > >>>
> > >>> From Dave vonKleist, co-host of The Power Hour radio program and
> > >>> writer/producer of the album "Will Someone Listen" & William Lewis,
> producer
> > >>> of "American Freedom News", "TruNews" and producer/writer of the
> album
> > >>> "Police State" comes a full length documentary exposing one of the
> largest
> > >>> conspiracies ever uncovered. With the pounding force of a
> sledgehammer you
> > >>> will find yourself horrified and astonished at the shear scope of the
> > >>> largest transgressions ever carried out against the people of the
> United
> > >>> States and indeed... of the entire world.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> ------------------------------------------
> > >>> Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett
> > >>> On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 12:14 PM, Gier, Nicholas <NGIER at uidaho.edu
> <mailto:
> > >>> NGIER at uidaho.edu>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Greetings:
> > >>>
> > >>> The Tea Party candidate in the three-way primary for Texas
> > >>> governor said to Glenn Beck that she was still looking at the
> > >>> evidence for a 9-11 cover-up. Beck's response was something like
> > >>> "We'd better look at another candidate!" Yes the Tea Party
> > >>> people include not only "birthers" but "truthers."
> > >>>
> > >>> Nick Gier
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>> From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com
> > >>> <mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com> on behalf of Garrett
> Clevenger
> > >>> Sent: Fri 3/12/2010 11:36 AM
> > >>> To: vision2020 at moscow.com <mailto:vision2020 at moscow.com>
> > >>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] teabaggers
> > >>>
> > >>> "I have yet to see you, Tom, Nick or Wayne comment on those left
> > >>> wingers
> > >>> that think that 9/11 was an inside job of the Bush
> Administration."
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> I don't think only some left-wingers believe that. Some
> > >>> far-righters think there is a greater conspiracy relating to
> > >>> that, too.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> I don't think it's a stretch, though, to assume GWB used 911 to
> > >>> advance an agenda they had been planning on for a while (the
> > >>> PATRIOT act, invading Iraq, etc)
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> That makes GWB look suspicious, especially considering some of
> > >>> the discrepancies surrounding the 911 commission, which Bush
> > >>> initially was against.
> > >>>
> > >>> It's also suspicious that that Bush and Cheney both refused to
> > >>> testify under oath to the 911 commission.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Until someone looks at the arguments the 911 truthers are
> > >>> conveying (and there is lots of interesting arguments in their
> > >>> favor) you probably shouldn't be condemning what they say.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> I have no idea what the truth is, but I do know that powerful
> > >>> people are in control and do despicable things to advance their
> > >>> power, whether thats an islamofacist or whoever...
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Garrett Clevenger
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20100316/732c9f44/attachment-0001.html
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list