[Vision2020] Journal of 9/11 Studies: Peer Reviewed WorkRaising Questions

Tue Mar 30 21:52:30 PDT 2010

Wayne --

I'm explaining why only incompetence, and not malice, is required.
With the information Bush had before 9/11, I'm not sure what an
appropriate response would have been. Are you sure?

-- ACS

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Art Deco <deco at moscow.com> wrote:
> Changing the subject is not arguing the point at issue.
>
> W.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Andreas Schou
> To: Ted Moffett
> Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com ; Gier, Nicholas ; Garrett Clevenger
> Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 4:38 PM
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Journal of 9/11 Studies: Peer Reviewed WorkRaising
> Questions
> Ted --
>
> Let's say you have a sheet of paper that says "Bin Laden Determined to
> Strike in US." You know that this is true. You have access to the full
> might of the American military, police, and intelligence apparatus.
> What do you do in response?
>
> -- ACS
>
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Ted Moffett <starbliss at gmail.com> wrote:
>> OK. The 9/11 conspiracy speculations are "just wild theories."
>>
>> Anyway, will you acknowledge that the following facts, especially the
>> August
>> 6, 2001 briefing to President Bush, which warned "Bin Laden Determined to
>> Strike in US" are not wild theories, but well verified facts? And that
>> Condoleezza Rice's comments made post 9/11 referenced below, either
>> indicate
>> she was woefully ignorant on these issues, which I strongly doubt, or she
>> was trying to whitewash Bush administration failures regarding 9/11?
>>
>> ------------------------------------------
>> Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Ted Moffett <starbliss at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I offered well documented facts that the Bush administration knew that
>>> "Bin Laden determined to strike in US," from an August 6, 2001 briefing
>>> (here is a partial transcript:
>>> http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/10/august6.memo/ ), and that it
>>> was
>>> known that using commercial jets as weapons was a potential tactic,
>>> despite
>>> rather incredible statements from National Security Advisor Condoleezza
>>> Rice
>>> post 9/11 that there was "nothing to suggest" the 9/11 style attacks were
>>> likely. Condoleezza Rice was/is too intelligent and well educated to make
>>> this statement, so I suspect she was engaging in public relations
>>> propaganda
>>> to whitewash Bush administration failures regarding 9/11. Note the
>>> comment
>>> in the August 6 briefing that mentions the prior World Trade Center
>>> attack,
>>> as an example of what Bin Laden intended. How difficult could it be to
>>> predict that finishing the job of the prior World Trade Center attack, to
>>> do
>>> major damage to the building(s), would be a likely terror plot?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 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
>>>
>>> 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]
>>> 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] 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 Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 10:46 AM, lfalen <lfalen at turbonet.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I question that they are well documented facts. There may very well be
>>>> those that would have liked it to occur.
>>>> That does not mean any on in authority allowed it to happen. You usually
>>>> rely on science. You should know that you can't prove a negative.
>>>> Roger
>>>> -----Original message-----
>>>> From: Ted Moffett starbliss at gmail.com
>>>> Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 17:03:04 -0700
>>>> To: lfalen lfalen at turbonet.com
>>>> Subject: Re: Former US Senator & 9/11 Commissoner Max Cleland:
>>>> "thisgovernmentknew a whole lot more about these terrorists before
>>>> September
>>>> 11
>>>> than it has ever admitted...."
>>>>
>>>> > There are well documented facts, offered in the sources I referenced,
>>>> > that
>>>> > raise serious questions about the actions (or non-actions) of US
>>>> > agents
>>>> > during the Bush administration, regarding why more was not done to
>>>> > stop
>>>> > the
>>>> > 9/11 attacks. To label these questions "ridiculous," is to dismiss
>>>> > these
>>>> > important facts as though you have certainty that there were no agents
>>>> > of
>>>> > the US who wished to exploit a terror attack against the US to pursue
>>>> > the
>>>> > agenda of the "Project for the New American Century." As for proof, I
>>>> > did
>>>> > not claim to have *proof* that the 9/11 attacks were "allowed" to
>>>> > happen.
>>>> > But consider, there is no proof that I am aware of, that there was not
>>>> > complicity of US agents to allow 9/11 to happen, to exploit a terror
>>>> > attack,
>>>> > a "new Pearl Harbor," to push for the expansion of US military power
>>>> > as
>>>> > described at the document at the website below. Or can you offer such
>>>> > proof? If not, the question remains open.
>>>> >
>>>> > "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy,
>>>> > Forces and Resources for a New Century" September 2000:
>>>> >
>>>> > http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf
>>>> > ------------------------------------------
>>>> > Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett
>>>> >
>>>> > On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 1:49 PM, lfalen <lfalen at turbonet.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > > There has many books written,lawsuits and movies about the Warren
>>>> > > Commission also. Anybody can write a book speculating on
>>>> > > conspiracies. This
>>>> > > is not proof of anything.
>>>> > > Roger
>>>> > > -----Original message-----
>>>> > > From: Ted Moffett starbliss at gmail.com
>>>> > > Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 17:10:31 -0700
>>>> > > To: lfalen lfalen at turbonet.com
>>>> > > Subject: Former US Senator & 9/11 Commissoner Max Cleland: "this
>>>> > > governmentknew a whole lot more about these terrorists before
>>>> > > September 11
>>>> > > than it has
>>>> > > ever admitted...."
>>>> > >
>>>> > > > If there was an effort to exploit a pending terror attack, a "new
>>>> > > Pearl
>>>> > > > Harbor,"
>>>> > > > to pursue an agenda of expansion of US military power (as outlined
>>>> > > > by
>>>> > > "The
>>>> > > > Project for the New American Century" neo-cons (
>>>> > > > http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf
>>>> > > > ), the
>>>> > > > efforts would have been black-ops intelligence, with multiple
>>>> > > > layers of
>>>> > > > plausible tenability and secrecy such an effort would demand. And
>>>> > > > if
>>>> > > anyone
>>>> > > > thinks the US does not engage in black-ops, that are guarded with
>>>> > > > the
>>>> > > utmost
>>>> > > > secrecy, I have some ocean front property for sale in Utah at a
>>>> > > > bargain
>>>> > > > price.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > I am not basing my concerns regarding questioning the actions of
>>>> > > > US
>>>> > > agents
>>>> > > > before 9/11 and after on wild speculation or fringe conspiracy
>>>> > > > theories.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > Credible well researched investigations into the 9/11 Commission
>>>> > > > uncover
>>>> > > > numerous very serious problems with their conclusions. Before
>>>> > > > closing
>>>> > > your
>>>> > > > mind, you might want to do more reading:
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/04/books/04thom.html
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > THE COMMISSION
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Commission
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > By Philip Shenon
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > ----------------------------------
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > http://www.harpers.org/archive/2004/10/0080234
>>>> > > > Whitewash as public service:
>>>> > > > How *The 9/11 Commission Report* defrauds the nation
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > *By Benjamin DeMott
>>>> > > > <http://www.harpers.org/subjects/BenjaminDeMott>*
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > *----------------------------------------*
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > http://911pft.com/pft/catalog/In-Their-Own-Words-p-10.html
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > In late 2006, the movie 9/11 Press For Truth became a worldwide
>>>> > > underground
>>>> > > > hit. It exposed the story of the "Jersey Girls" and their allies
>>>> > > > --
>>>> > > > the
>>>> > > 9/11
>>>> > > > families who had fought for the Commission but ultimately failed
>>>> > > > in
>>>> > > seeing
>>>> > > > 70% of their questions answered.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > A unique, balanced look at a diverse group of topics includes:
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > - Top officials' whereabouts and changing stories on the day of
>>>> > > > 9/11
>>>> > > > - Insider trading before the attacks
>>>> > > > - War games coinciding with Sept. 11th
>>>> > > > - A confrontation between the families and FBI Director Mueller
>>>> > > > - British reports that some of the hijackers named by the FBI
>>>> > > > are
>>>> > > simply
>>>> > > > wrong
>>>> > > > - Government whistleblowers' calls for accountability
>>>> > > > - The FBI informant who lived with 2 of the hijackers
>>>> > > > - A Defense Department program that identified 4 hijackers in
>>>> > > > 2000
>>>> > > > - The families' push to receive the Pentagon crash tapes
>>>> > > > - Bin Laden extradition negotiations after 9/11
>>>> > > > - The Project For the New American Century
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > ----------------
>>>> > > > http://www.911truth.org/downloads/9-11_coverup_booklet.pdf
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > Former 9/11 commissioner and Senator Max Cleland attacked his own
>>>> > > commission
>>>> > > > after the other members cut a deal to accept highly limited access
>>>> > > > to CIA
>>>> > > > reports to the White House that may indicate advance knowledge of
>>>> > > > the
>>>> > > > attacks on the part of the Bush administration. "This is a scam,"
>>>> > > > Cleland
>>>> > > > said. "It's disgusting. America is being cheated."
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > "As each day goes by," Cleland said, "we learn that this
>>>> > > > government
>>>> > > > knew
>>>> > > a
>>>> > > > whole lot more about these terrorists before September 11 than it
>>>> > > > has
>>>> > > ever
>>>> > > > admitted.... Let's chase this rabbit into the ground. They had a
>>>> > > > plan to
>>>> > > go
>>>> > > > to war and when 9/11 happened that's what they did; they went to
>>>> > > > war."
>>>> > > > ------------------------------------------
>>>> > > > Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 11:31 AM, lfalen <lfalen at turbonet.com>
>>>> > > > wrote:
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > > I am glad that you say "if". Regardless of that is is ridiculous
>>>> > > > > to
>>>> > > assert
>>>> > > > > that it may have been planed by anyone in the Bush
>>>> > > > > administration. To
>>>> > > say
>>>> > > > > some heads should have rolled may be appropriate , but hind
>>>> > > > > sight
>>>> > > > > is
>>>> > > always
>>>> > > > > better than foresight.
>>>> > > > > Roger
>>>> > > > > -----Original message-----
>>>> > > > > From: Ted Moffett starbliss at gmail.com
>>>> > > > > Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 17:01:38 -0700
>>>> > > > > To: lfalen lfalen at turbonet.com
>>>> > > > > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] The Power Hour "Libertarian" Radio
>>>> > > > > ShowPromotesClaim of 9/11 Cover-up[
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > > 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
>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
>>>> > > > > > > > >>
>>>> > > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > >
>>>> > >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>> =======================================================
>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>> http://www.fsr.net
>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> =======================================================
>>
>
> =======================================================
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
>
> =======================================================
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>               http://www.fsr.net
>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
>