<div>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 <strong><em>proof</em></strong> 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.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>"Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy,<br>Forces and Resources for a New Century" September 2000:<br><br><a href="http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf">http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf</a></div>
<div>------------------------------------------</div>
<div>Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett<br><br></div>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 1:49 PM, lfalen <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:lfalen@turbonet.com">lfalen@turbonet.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote style="BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex" class="gmail_quote">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.<br>
<div class="im">Roger<br>-----Original message-----<br>From: Ted Moffett <a href="mailto:starbliss@gmail.com">starbliss@gmail.com</a><br></div>
<div class="im">Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 17:10:31 -0700<br>To: lfalen <a href="mailto:lfalen@turbonet.com">lfalen@turbonet.com</a><br></div>
<div class="im">Subject: Former US Senator & 9/11 Commissoner Max Cleland: "this governmentknew a whole lot more about these terrorists before September 11 than it has<br>ever admitted...."<br><br></div>
<div>
<div></div>
<div class="h5">> If there was an effort to exploit a pending terror attack, a "new Pearl<br>> Harbor,"<br>> to pursue an agenda of expansion of US military power (as outlined by "The<br>> Project for the New American Century" neo-cons (<br>
> <a href="http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf</a> ), the<br>> efforts would have been black-ops intelligence, with multiple layers of<br>
> plausible tenability and secrecy such an effort would demand. And if anyone<br>> thinks the US does not engage in black-ops, that are guarded with the utmost<br>> secrecy, I have some ocean front property for sale in Utah at a bargain<br>
> price.<br>><br>> I am not basing my concerns regarding questioning the actions of US agents<br>> before 9/11 and after on wild speculation or fringe conspiracy theories.<br>><br>> Credible well researched investigations into the 9/11 Commission uncover<br>
> numerous very serious problems with their conclusions. Before closing your<br>> mind, you might want to do more reading:<br>><br>> <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/04/books/04thom.html" target="_blank">http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/04/books/04thom.html</a><br>
><br>> THE COMMISSION<br>><br>> The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Commission<br>><br>> By Philip Shenon<br>><br>> ----------------------------------<br>><br>> <a href="http://www.harpers.org/archive/2004/10/0080234" target="_blank">http://www.harpers.org/archive/2004/10/0080234</a><br>
> Whitewash as public service:<br>> How *The 9/11 Commission Report* defrauds the nation<br>><br></div></div>> *By Benjamin DeMott <<a href="http://www.harpers.org/subjects/BenjaminDeMott" target="_blank">http://www.harpers.org/subjects/BenjaminDeMott</a>>*<br>
><br>> *----------------------------------------*<br>
<div>
<div></div>
<div class="h5">><br>> <a href="http://911pft.com/pft/catalog/In-Their-Own-Words-p-10.html" target="_blank">http://911pft.com/pft/catalog/In-Their-Own-Words-p-10.html</a><br>><br>> In late 2006, the movie 9/11 Press For Truth became a worldwide underground<br>
> hit. It exposed the story of the "Jersey Girls" and their allies -- the 9/11<br>> families who had fought for the Commission but ultimately failed in seeing<br>> 70% of their questions answered.<br>><br>
> A unique, balanced look at a diverse group of topics includes:<br>><br>> - Top officials' whereabouts and changing stories on the day of 9/11<br>> - Insider trading before the attacks<br>> - War games coinciding with Sept. 11th<br>
> - A confrontation between the families and FBI Director Mueller<br>> - British reports that some of the hijackers named by the FBI are simply<br>> wrong<br>> - Government whistleblowers' calls for accountability<br>
> - The FBI informant who lived with 2 of the hijackers<br>> - A Defense Department program that identified 4 hijackers in 2000<br>> - The families' push to receive the Pentagon crash tapes<br>> - Bin Laden extradition negotiations after 9/11<br>
> - The Project For the New American Century<br>><br>> ----------------<br>> <a href="http://www.911truth.org/downloads/9-11_coverup_booklet.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.911truth.org/downloads/9-11_coverup_booklet.pdf</a><br>
><br>> Former 9/11 commissioner and Senator Max Cleland attacked his own commission<br>> after the other members cut a deal to accept highly limited access to CIA<br>> reports to the White House that may indicate advance knowledge of the<br>
> attacks on the part of the Bush administration. "This is a scam," Cleland<br>> said. "It's disgusting. America is being cheated."<br>><br>> "As each day goes by," Cleland said, "we learn that this government knew a<br>
> whole lot more about these terrorists before September 11 than it has ever<br>> admitted.... Let's chase this rabbit into the ground. They had a plan to go<br>> to war and when 9/11 happened that's what they did; they went to war."<br>
> ------------------------------------------<br>> Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett<br>><br>> On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 11:31 AM, lfalen <<a href="mailto:lfalen@turbonet.com">lfalen@turbonet.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>> > I am glad that you say "if". Regardless of that is is ridiculous to assert<br>> > that it may have been planed by anyone in the Bush administration. To say<br>> > some heads should have rolled may be appropriate , but hind sight is always<br>
> > better than foresight.<br>> > Roger<br>> > -----Original message-----<br>> > From: Ted Moffett <a href="mailto:starbliss@gmail.com">starbliss@gmail.com</a><br>> > Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 17:01:38 -0700<br>
> > To: lfalen <a href="mailto:lfalen@turbonet.com">lfalen@turbonet.com</a><br>> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] The Power Hour "Libertarian" Radio<br>> > ShowPromotesClaim of 9/11 Cover-up[<br>> ><br>
> > > I am not saying President W. Bush deliberately allowed 9/11 to happen,<br>> > > except insofar as he was incompetent. And the historical facts in my post<br>> > > are accurate. Name one fact in the post you responded to that is not<br>
> > well<br>> > > verified.<br>> > ><br>> > > *If, and I emphasize if*, there was any deliberate intentional<br>> > malfeasance<br>> > > among agents of the US to exploit a pending terror attack against the US<br>
> > to<br>> > > promote the agenda of the "Project for the New American Century" (Cheney<br>> > and<br>> > > Rumsfeld supported this project) which is rather explicit in documents<br>
> > > noting that a "new Pearl Harbor" would provide the justification for an<br>> > > expansion of US military hegemony, President W. Bush would likely have<br>> > been<br>> > > a figure head, not a planner of such malfeasance, and likely kept out of<br>
> > the<br>> > > loop.<br>> > ><br>> > > Some think that Cheney was more president, in reality, than Bush during<br>> > his<br>> > > presidency.<br>> > > ------------------------------------------<br>
> > > Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett<br>> > ><br>> > > On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 11:26 AM, lfalen <<a href="mailto:lfalen@turbonet.com">lfalen@turbonet.com</a>> wrote:<br>> > ><br>> > > > Your history is distorted. Bush did not allow 9/11 to happen anymore<br>
> > than<br>> > > > FDR allowed Pearl Harbor to happen( I am not a fan of either). On Pearl<br>> > > > Harbor the Japanese code was broken and a message was sent out. Neither<br>> > FDR<br>
> > > > or the military higher ups received it.<br>> > > > Roger<br>> > > > -----Original message-----<br>> > > > From: Ted Moffett <a href="mailto:starbliss@gmail.com">starbliss@gmail.com</a><br>
> > > > Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2010 13:33:05 -0700<br>> > > > To: Paul Rumelhart <a href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com">godshatter@yahoo.com</a><br>> > > > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] The Power Hour "Libertarian" Radio Show<br>
> > > > PromotesClaim of 9/11 Cover-up[<br>> > > ><br>> > > > > President Bush's August briefing before 9/11 explicitly stated "Bin<br>> > Laden<br>> > > > > determined to strike in US."<br>
> > > > ><br>> > > > > I question the theory that the 9/11 attacks and the collapse of the<br>> > > > > buildings involved was orchestrated by agents of the US. But the<br>> > theory<br>
> > > > > that 9/11 was "allowed" to happen, that there was substantial<br>> > evidence<br>> > > > that<br>> > > > > terrorists were going to strike the US, but the aggressive actions<br>
> > > > required<br>> > > > > to stop the attack were deliberately avoided, is possible, given that<br>> > the<br>> > > > > neo-con "Project for the New American Century" explicitly stated in<br>
> > > > military<br>> > > > > think tank analysis prior to 9/11 ("Rebuilding America's Defenses:<br>> > > > Strategy,<br>> > > > > Forces and Resources for a New Century" September 2000:<br>
> > > > > <a href="http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf</a> ),<br>> > > > that a<br>
> > > > > "new Pearl Harbor" would provide the justification for the expansion<br>> > of<br>> > > > US<br>> > > > > military power into the Middle East and elsewhere.<br>
> > > > ><br>> > > > > At best, the fact that more aggressive steps were not taken to stop<br>> > the<br>> > > > 9/11<br>> > > > > attacks, reveals gross incompetence, if not a deliberate conspiracy<br>
> > to<br>> > > > > exploit a major terror attack against the US as a "new Pearl Harbor"<br>> > to<br>> > > > > expand US military/economic hegemony. Cheney and Rumsfeld signed the<br>
> > > > > "Statement of Principles" for the "Project for the New American<br>> > Century"<br>> > > > in<br>> > > > > 1997 ( <a href="http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm" target="_blank">http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm</a>).<br>
> > > > It is<br>> > > > > no surprise they assumed positions of great power in the second Bush<br>> > > > > administration, given the agenda to expand US military/economic<br>> > hegemony<br>
> > > > was<br>> > > > > planned well in advance, if they could gain the White House back.<br>> > > > ><br>> > > > > I won't continue a history lesson here (the two websites below offer<br>
> > a<br>> > > > > critical analysis of 9/11 orthodoxy). But there are very serious<br>> > > > questions<br>> > > > > that can be raised regarding why more aggressive steps were not taken<br>
> > to<br>> > > > > stop the 9/11 plot, given the information we know the US government<br>> > > > > possessed regarding the plans for a terror attack on the US, who<br>> > might<br>
> > > > carry<br>> > > > > out such an attack, and that use of commercial aircraft as terror<br>> > weapons<br>> > > > > was known prior to 9/11 as a likely method. Bush administration<br>
> > national<br>> > > > > security advisor Condoleeza Rice was either woefully uninformed,<br>> > which I<br>> > > > > doubt given her intelligence, or engaging in "spin" propaganda to<br>
> > hide<br>> > > > the<br>> > > > > tracks of Bush administration failures regarding the 9/11 attacks,<br>> > when<br>> > > > she<br>> > > > > made the statements quoted from the second website below:<br>
> > > > ><br>> > > > > <a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO405E.html" target="_blank">http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO405E.html</a><br>> > > > ><br>> > > > > ---------------------<br>
> > > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > <a href="http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?the_post-9/11_world=denials&timeline=complete_911_timeline" target="_blank">http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?the_post-9/11_world=denials&timeline=complete_911_timeline</a><br>
> > > > ><br>> > > > > >From website immediately above:<br>> > > > > May 16, 2002: Nobody Predicted 9/11-Style Attacks, Says Condoleezza<br>> > > > > Rice<<br>
> > > > <a href="http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a051602rice#a051602rice" target="_blank">http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a051602rice#a051602rice</a><br>> > ><br>> > > > > [image: Edit event]<<br>
> > > ><br>> > <a href="http://www.historycommons.org/eventedit.jsp?oid=1626004942-36209&drafts=null&timeline=complete_911_timeline" target="_blank">http://www.historycommons.org/eventedit.jsp?oid=1626004942-36209&drafts=null&timeline=complete_911_timeline</a><br>
> > > > ><br>> > > > ><br>> > > > ><br>> > > > > [image: National Security Adviser Rice tries to explain what Bush<br>> > knew<br>> > > > and<br>
> > > > > when in her May 16, 2002 press conference.]National Security Adviser<br>> > Rice<br>> > > > > tries to explain what Bush knew and when in her May 16, 2002 press<br>> > > > > conference. *[Source: CNN]*National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice<br>
> > > > > states, “I don’t think anybody could have predicted that these people<br>> > > > would<br>> > > > > take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center, take<br>> > another<br>
> > > > one<br>> > > > > and slam it into the Pentagon, that they would try to use an airplane<br>> > as<br>> > > > a<br>> > > > > missile,” adding that “even in retrospect” there was “nothing” to<br>
> > suggest<br>> > > > > that. [White House,<br>> > > > > 5/16/2002<<br>> > > ><br>> > <a href="http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/05/20020516-13.html" target="_blank">http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/05/20020516-13.html</a><br>
> > > > ><br>> > > > > ] Contradicting Rice’s claims, former CIA Deputy Director John Gannon<br>> > > > > acknowledges that such a scenario has long been taken seriously by US<br>
> > > > > intelligence: “If you ask anybody could terrorists convert a plane<br>> > into a<br>> > > > > missile? [N]obody would have ruled that out.” Rice also states, “The<br>> > > > > overwhelming bulk of the evidence was that this was an attack that<br>
> > was<br>> > > > > likely to take place overseas.” [MSNBC, 5/17/2002] Slate awards Rice<br>> > the<br>> > > > > “Whopper of the Week” when the title of Bush’s August 6 briefing is<br>
> > > > > revealed: “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US.” [Slate,<br>> > > > > 5/23/2002<<a href="http://slate.msn.com/?id=2066154" target="_blank">http://slate.msn.com/?id=2066154</a>><br>
> > > > > ] Rice later will concede that “somebody did imagine it” but will say<br>> > she<br>> > > > > did not know about such intelligence until well after this<br>> > conference.<br>
> > > > > [Associated<br>> > > > > Press, 9/21/2002]<br>> > > > > ------------------------------------------<br>> > > > ><br>> > > > > Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett<br>
> > > > > On 3/14/10, Paul Rumelhart <<a href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com">godshatter@yahoo.com</a>> wrote:<br>> > > > > ><br>> > > > > ><br>> > > > > > Trust, once lost, takes a lot of work to get back. When you have<br>
> > the<br>> > > > U.S.<br>> > > > > > government arming Osama and the CIA enabling drug trafficking for<br>> > the<br>> > > > > > Contras, it's not a big stretch to wonder if they had any<br>
> > involvement<br>> > > > in<br>> > > > > > 9/11. There are enough strange things surrounding 9/11 that I<br>> > would<br>> > > > not be<br>> > > > > > surprised to find the government was involved.<br>
> > > > > ><br>> > > > > > The reason I obey traffic laws has more to do with safety than<br>> > trust of<br>> > > > the<br>> > > > > > government. Generally, the system works well enough that you can<br>
> > at<br>> > > > least<br>> > > > > > have some faith in a contract, and some hope the police will<br>> > respond if<br>> > > > you<br>> > > > > > call them. I wouldn't want to be the guy that happened across some<br>
> > > > > > confidential documents or saw the wrong thing go down at the wrong<br>> > > > time,<br>> > > > > > though.<br>> > > > > ><br>> > > > > > Paul<br>
> > > > > ><br>> > > > > > Wayne Price wrote:<br>> > > > > ><br>> > > > > >> Ted, et al,<br>> > > > > >><br>> > > > > >> One has to ask, or at least I do, why would people put any faith<br>
> > in<br>> > > > these<br>> > > > > >> wild stories? While, I don't agree with 9/11 being an inside job,<br>> > > > there is<br>> > > > > >> a general distrust of ALL levels of government that just<br>
> > > > > >> feed into things like this. And not just on the national level,<br>> > but<br>> > > > more<br>> > > > > >> importantly at the local levels as well. For instance, does anyone<br>
> > > > living in<br>> > > > > >> Northern Idaho really think the "boys in Boise" even care about<br>> > North<br>> > > > > >> Idaho?<br>> > > > > >> If they feel that way, why? Does anyone trust an employment<br>
> > contract<br>> > > > or<br>> > > > > >> retirement contract with the U of I? If not, why? Can you trust<br>> > that<br>> > > > the<br>> > > > > >> speed limits on our county roads are legitimate? If not, why?<br>
> > > > > >><br>> > > > > >><br>> > > > > >> Distrust of "government",once it starts, is hard to turn around<br>> > and I<br>> > > > > >> believe that in America, we have a long long way to go.<br>
> > Perceptions,<br>> > > > good or<br>> > > > > >> bad are real, even though they may not be true. And it is in the<br>> > light<br>> > > > of<br>> > > > > >> those perceptions that people live, not in light of the truth or<br>
> > > > falsity of<br>> > > > > >> an issue.<br>> > > > > >><br>> > > > > >><br>> > > > > >><br>> > > > > >><br>
> > > > > >><br>> > > > > >><br>> > > > > >><br>> > > > > >><br>> > > ><br>> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
> > > > > >> On Mar 13, 2010, at 4:42 PM, Ted Moffett wrote:<br>> > > > > >><br>> > > > > >> There are a lot of "conservatives" who believe in a government<br>
> > > > cover-up<br>> > > > > >>> regarding the facts of 9/11.<br>> > > > > >>> There is a radio show that has a large following that has been<br>> > on<br>
> > > > the<br>> > > > > >>> air for years, that I have listened to numerous times on<br>> > shortwave,<br>> > > > that is<br>> > > > > >>> very political but in some ways hard to stereotype. I suppose<br>
> > you<br>> > > > could<br>> > > > > >>> call it hard core libertarian (they passionately promoted Ron<br>> > Paul's<br>> > > > > >>> presidential bid), which means that it is very distrustful of<br>
> > > > government in<br>> > > > > >>> a consistent aggressive way that many traditional "mainstream"<br>> > > > conservatives<br>> > > > > >>> are not. Anti-abortion views are expressed, which fits the<br>
> > current<br>> > > > > >>> Republican agenda, but there are two issues that have received a<br>> > lot<br>> > > > of air<br>> > > > > >>> time where the show has argued for government cover-ups, Gulf War<br>
> > > > Syndrome<br>> > > > > >>> among vets, and 9/11. This show aggressively attacked the Bush<br>> > > > > >>> administration, and is doing the same to Obama's. Main website<br>
> > for<br>> > > > this<br>> > > > > >>> radio show:<br>> > > > > >>> <a href="http://www.thepowerhour.com/" target="_blank">http://www.thepowerhour.com/</a><br>
> > > > > >>> ---------------------------------------------<br>> > > > > >>> The following documentary described at the website below,<br>> > promoted by<br>> > > > > >>> "The Power Hour," pulls no punches regarding what it claims was<br>
> > "a<br>> > > > massive<br>> > > > > >>> cover-up" regarding 9/11:<br>> > > > > >>> <a href="http://www.thepowermall.com/" target="_blank">http://www.thepowermall.com/</a><br>
> > > > > >>> *911 In Plane Site<br>> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>> *New* "The Directors Cut" *with *"More Footage - More Photographs<br>
> > -<br>> > > > More<br>> > > > > >>> Evidence" *<br>> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>> *PRODUCER: Dave vonKleist*<br>> > > > > >>> DIRECTOR: William Lewis<br>
> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>> Due to the overwhelming response of "911 In Plane Site," we were<br>> > able<br>> > > > to<br>> > > > > >>> collect mountains of new footage and photographs from sources all<br>
> > > > over the<br>> > > > > >>> world. We can now say, without a shadow of doubt, that we have<br>> > > > undeniable<br>> > > > > >>> evidence of a massive cover-up. From the 16 ft. hole in the outer<br>
> > > > walls of<br>> > > > > >>> the Pentagon to the news reports of bombs, explosions and<br>> > potential<br>> > > > > >>> demolition of World Trade Centers 1, 2 and 7, to the strange<br>
> > > > attachment on<br>> > > > > >>> the bottom of Flight 175 and the mysterious flashes caught on<br>> > > > videotape by<br>> > > > > >>> at least five separate sources, it is clear - 911 was an inside<br>
> > job.<br>> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>> From Dave vonKleist, co-host of The Power Hour radio program and<br>> > > > > >>> writer/producer of the album "Will Someone Listen" & William<br>
> > Lewis,<br>> > > > producer<br>> > > > > >>> of "American Freedom News", "TruNews" and producer/writer of the<br>> > > > album<br>> > > > > >>> "Police State" comes a full length documentary exposing one of<br>
> > the<br>> > > > largest<br>> > > > > >>> conspiracies ever uncovered. With the pounding force of a<br>> > > > sledgehammer you<br>> > > > > >>> will find yourself horrified and astonished at the shear scope of<br>
> > the<br>> > > > > >>> largest transgressions ever carried out against the people of the<br>> > > > United<br>> > > > > >>> States and indeed... of the entire world.<br>
> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>> ------------------------------------------<br>> > > > > >>> Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett<br>
> > > > > >>> On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 12:14 PM, Gier, Nicholas <<br>> > <a href="mailto:NGIER@uidaho.edu">NGIER@uidaho.edu</a><br>> > > > <mailto:<br>> > > > > >>> <a href="mailto:NGIER@uidaho.edu">NGIER@uidaho.edu</a>>> wrote:<br>
> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>> Greetings:<br>> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>> The Tea Party candidate in the three-way primary for Texas<br>
> > > > > >>> governor said to Glenn Beck that she was still looking at the<br>> > > > > >>> evidence for a 9-11 cover-up. Beck's response was something<br>> > like<br>
> > > > > >>> "We'd better look at another candidate!" Yes the Tea Party<br>> > > > > >>> people include not only "birthers" but "truthers."<br>
> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>> Nick Gier<br>> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>><br>
> > > > > >>> -----Original Message-----<br>> > > > > >>> From: <a href="mailto:vision2020-bounces@moscow.com">vision2020-bounces@moscow.com</a><br>> > > > > >>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:vision2020-bounces@moscow.com">vision2020-bounces@moscow.com</a>> on behalf of Garrett<br>
> > > > Clevenger<br>> > > > > >>> Sent: Fri 3/12/2010 11:36 AM<br>> > > > > >>> To: <a href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</a>><br>
> > > > > >>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] teabaggers<br>> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>> "I have yet to see you, Tom, Nick or Wayne comment on those<br>
> > left<br>> > > > > >>> wingers<br>> > > > > >>> that think that 9/11 was an inside job of the Bush<br>> > > > Administration."<br>> > > > > >>><br>
> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>> I don't think only some left-wingers believe that. Some<br>> > > > > >>> far-righters think there is a greater conspiracy relating to<br>
> > > > > >>> that, too.<br>> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>> I don't think it's a stretch, though, to assume GWB used 911<br>
> > to<br>> > > > > >>> advance an agenda they had been planning on for a while (the<br>> > > > > >>> PATRIOT act, invading Iraq, etc)<br>> > > > > >>><br>
> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>> That makes GWB look suspicious, especially considering some of<br>> > > > > >>> the discrepancies surrounding the 911 commission, which Bush<br>
> > > > > >>> initially was against.<br>> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>> It's also suspicious that that Bush and Cheney both refused to<br>> > > > > >>> testify under oath to the 911 commission.<br>
> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>> Until someone looks at the arguments the 911 truthers are<br>> > > > > >>> conveying (and there is lots of interesting arguments in their<br>
> > > > > >>> favor) you probably shouldn't be condemning what they say.<br>> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>> I have no idea what the truth is, but I do know that powerful<br>
> > > > > >>> people are in control and do despicable things to advance<br>> > their<br>> > > > > >>> power, whether thats an islamofacist or whoever...<br>> > > > > >>><br>
> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>> Garrett Clevenger<br>> > > > > >>><br>
> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>><br>> > > > > >>><br>
> > > > > >><br>> > > > ><br>> > > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > ><br>> > ><br>> ><br>><br>><br></div></div></blockquote></div><br>