<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.18876">
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Changing the subject is not arguing the point at
issue.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>W.</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=ophite@gmail.com href="mailto:ophite@gmail.com">Andreas Schou</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=starbliss@gmail.com
href="mailto:starbliss@gmail.com">Ted Moffett</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A title=vision2020@moscow.com
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</A> ; <A
title=NGIER@uidaho.edu href="mailto:NGIER@uidaho.edu">Gier, Nicholas</A> ; <A
title=garrettmc@verizon.net href="mailto:garrettmc@verizon.net">Garrett
Clevenger</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, March 30, 2010 4:38
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Vision2020] Journal of 9/11
Studies: Peer Reviewed WorkRaising Questions</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>Ted --<BR><BR>Let's say you have a sheet of paper that says
"Bin Laden Determined to<BR>Strike in US." You know that this is true. You
have access to the full<BR>might of the American military, police, and
intelligence apparatus.<BR>What do you do in response?<BR><BR>-- ACS<BR><BR>On
Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Ted Moffett <<A
href="mailto:starbliss@gmail.com">starbliss@gmail.com</A>> wrote:<BR>>
OK. The 9/11 conspiracy speculations are "just wild theories."<BR>><BR>>
Anyway, will you acknowledge that the following facts, especially the
August<BR>> 6, 2001 briefing to President Bush, which warned "Bin Laden
Determined to<BR>> Strike in US" are not wild theories, but well verified
facts? And that<BR>> Condoleezza Rice's comments made post 9/11 referenced
below, either indicate<BR>> she was woefully ignorant on these issues,
which I strongly doubt, or she<BR>> was trying to whitewash Bush
administration failures regarding 9/11?<BR>><BR>>
------------------------------------------<BR>> Vision2020 Post: Ted
Moffett<BR>><BR>> On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Ted Moffett <<A
href="mailto:starbliss@gmail.com">starbliss@gmail.com</A>>
wrote:<BR>>><BR>>> I offered well documented facts that the Bush
administration knew that<BR>>> "Bin Laden determined to strike in US,"
from an August 6, 2001 briefing<BR>>> (here is a partial
transcript:<BR>>> <A
href="http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/10/august6.memo/">http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/10/august6.memo/</A>
), and that it was<BR>>> known that using commercial jets as weapons was
a potential tactic, despite<BR>>> rather incredible statements from
National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice<BR>>> post 9/11 that there
was "nothing to suggest" the 9/11 style attacks were<BR>>> likely.
Condoleezza Rice was/is too intelligent and well educated to make<BR>>>
this statement, so I suspect she was engaging in public relations
propaganda<BR>>> to whitewash Bush administration failures regarding
9/11. Note the comment<BR>>> in the August 6 briefing that mentions the
prior World Trade Center attack,<BR>>> as an example of what Bin Laden
intended. How difficult could it be to<BR>>> predict that finishing the
job of the prior World Trade Center attack, to do<BR>>> major damage to
the building(s), would be a likely terror
plot?<BR>>><BR>>><BR>>> <A
href="http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?the_post-9/11_world=denials&timeline=complete_911_timeline">http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?the_post-9/11_world=denials&timeline=complete_911_timeline</A><BR>>><BR>>>
From website immediately above:<BR>>><BR>>> May 16, 2002: Nobody
Predicted 9/11-Style Attacks, Says Condoleezza Rice<BR>>><BR>>>
National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice states, “I don’t think
anybody<BR>>> could have predicted that these people would take an
airplane and slam it<BR>>> into the World Trade Center, take another one
and slam it into the Pentagon,<BR>>> that they would try to use an
airplane as a missile,” adding that “even in<BR>>> retrospect” there was
“nothing” to suggest that. [White House, 5/16/2002]<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 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 was<BR>>> likely to take place overseas.” [MSNBC, 5/17/2002] Slate
awards Rice 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, 5/23/2002] Rice<BR>>> later will concede that “somebody did
imagine it” but will say she did not<BR>>> know about such intelligence
until well after this conference. [Associated<BR>>> Press,
9/21/2002]<BR>>><BR>>>
------------------------------------------<BR>>> Vision2020 Post: Ted
Moffett<BR>>><BR>>> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 10:46 AM, lfalen
<<A href="mailto:lfalen@turbonet.com">lfalen@turbonet.com</A>>
wrote:<BR>>>><BR>>>> I question that they are well
documented facts. There may very well be<BR>>>> those that would have
liked it to occur.<BR>>>> That does not mean any on in authority
allowed it to happen. You usually<BR>>>> rely on science. You should
know that you can't prove a negative.<BR>>>> Roger<BR>>>>
-----Original message-----<BR>>>> From: Ted Moffett <A
href="mailto:starbliss@gmail.com">starbliss@gmail.com</A><BR>>>>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 17:03:04 -0700<BR>>>> To: lfalen <A
href="mailto:lfalen@turbonet.com">lfalen@turbonet.com</A><BR>>>>
Subject: Re: Former US Senator & 9/11 Commissoner Max
Cleland:<BR>>>> "thisgovernmentknew a whole lot more about these
terrorists before September<BR>>>> 11<BR>>>> than it has
ever admitted...."<BR>>>><BR>>>> > There are well
documented facts, offered in the sources I referenced,<BR>>>> >
that<BR>>>> > raise serious questions about the actions (or
non-actions) of US agents<BR>>>> > during the Bush administration,
regarding why more was not done to stop<BR>>>> >
the<BR>>>> > 9/11 attacks. To label these questions "ridiculous,"
is to dismiss<BR>>>> > these<BR>>>> > important facts
as though you have certainty that there were no agents<BR>>>> >
of<BR>>>> > the US who wished to exploit a terror attack against
the US to pursue<BR>>>> > the<BR>>>> > agenda of the
"Project for the New American Century." As for proof, I<BR>>>> >
did<BR>>>> > not claim to have *proof* that the 9/11 attacks were
"allowed" to<BR>>>> > happen.<BR>>>> > But consider,
there is no proof that I am aware of, that there was not<BR>>>> >
complicity of US agents to allow 9/11 to happen, to exploit a
terror<BR>>>> > attack,<BR>>>> > a "new Pearl Harbor,"
to push for the expansion of US military power as<BR>>>> >
described at the document at the website below. Or can you offer
such<BR>>>> > proof? If not, the question remains
open.<BR>>>> ><BR>>>> > "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><BR>>>>
> ------------------------------------------<BR>>>> >
Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett<BR>>>> ><BR>>>> > On Mon,
Mar 22, 2010 at 1:49 PM, lfalen <<A
href="mailto:lfalen@turbonet.com">lfalen@turbonet.com</A>>
wrote:<BR>>>> ><BR>>>> > > There has many books
written,lawsuits and movies about the Warren<BR>>>> > >
Commission also. Anybody can write a book speculating on<BR>>>> >
> conspiracies. This<BR>>>> > > is not proof of
anything.<BR>>>> > > Roger<BR>>>> > >
-----Original message-----<BR>>>> > > From: Ted Moffett <A
href="mailto:starbliss@gmail.com">starbliss@gmail.com</A><BR>>>> >
> Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 17:10:31 -0700<BR>>>> > > To:
lfalen <A
href="mailto:lfalen@turbonet.com">lfalen@turbonet.com</A><BR>>>> >
> Subject: Former US Senator & 9/11 Commissoner Max Cleland:
"this<BR>>>> > > governmentknew a whole lot more about these
terrorists before<BR>>>> > > September 11<BR>>>> >
> than it has<BR>>>> > > ever admitted...."<BR>>>>
> ><BR>>>> > > > If there was an effort to exploit a
pending terror attack, a "new<BR>>>> > > Pearl<BR>>>>
> > > Harbor,"<BR>>>> > > > to pursue an agenda of
expansion of US military power (as outlined<BR>>>> > > >
by<BR>>>> > > "The<BR>>>> > > > Project for
the New American Century" neo-cons (<BR>>>> > > > <A
href="http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf">http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf</A><BR>>>>
> > > ), the<BR>>>> > > > efforts would have been
black-ops intelligence, with multiple<BR>>>> > > > layers
of<BR>>>> > > > plausible tenability and secrecy such an
effort would demand. And<BR>>>> > > > if<BR>>>>
> > anyone<BR>>>> > > > thinks the US does not engage
in black-ops, that are guarded with<BR>>>> > > >
the<BR>>>> > > utmost<BR>>>> > > > secrecy, I
have some ocean front property for sale in Utah at a<BR>>>> > >
> bargain<BR>>>> > > > price.<BR>>>> > >
><BR>>>> > > > I am not basing my concerns regarding
questioning the actions of US<BR>>>> > > agents<BR>>>>
> > > before 9/11 and after on wild speculation or fringe
conspiracy<BR>>>> > > > theories.<BR>>>> > >
><BR>>>> > > > Credible well researched investigations
into the 9/11 Commission<BR>>>> > > >
uncover<BR>>>> > > > numerous very serious problems with
their conclusions. Before<BR>>>> > > >
closing<BR>>>> > > your<BR>>>> > > > mind,
you might want to do more reading:<BR>>>> > >
><BR>>>> > > > <A
href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/04/books/04thom.html">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">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>>>> > > > *By Benjamin DeMott<BR>>>> >
> > <<A
href="http://www.harpers.org/subjects/BenjaminDeMott">http://www.harpers.org/subjects/BenjaminDeMott</A>>*<BR>>>>
> > ><BR>>>> > > >
*----------------------------------------*<BR>>>> > >
><BR>>>> > > > <A
href="http://911pft.com/pft/catalog/In-Their-Own-Words-p-10.html">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<BR>>>> > >
underground<BR>>>> > > > hit. It exposed the story of the
"Jersey Girls" and their allies --<BR>>>> > > >
the<BR>>>> > > 9/11<BR>>>> > > > families who
had fought for the Commission but ultimately failed in<BR>>>> >
> 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<BR>>>> > > >
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<BR>>>> > > >
are<BR>>>> > > 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<BR>>>> > > >
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">http://www.911truth.org/downloads/9-11_coverup_booklet.pdf</A><BR>>>>
> > ><BR>>>> > > > Former 9/11 commissioner and
Senator Max Cleland attacked his own<BR>>>> > >
commission<BR>>>> > > > after the other members cut a deal
to accept highly limited access<BR>>>> > > > to
CIA<BR>>>> > > > reports to the White House that may
indicate advance knowledge of<BR>>>> > > >
the<BR>>>> > > > attacks on the part of the Bush
administration. "This is a scam,"<BR>>>> > > >
Cleland<BR>>>> > > > said. "It's disgusting. America is
being cheated."<BR>>>> > > ><BR>>>> > > >
"As each day goes by," Cleland said, "we learn that this
government<BR>>>> > > > knew<BR>>>> > >
a<BR>>>> > > > whole lot more about these terrorists before
September 11 than it<BR>>>> > > > has<BR>>>> >
> ever<BR>>>> > > > admitted.... Let's chase this rabbit
into the ground. They had a<BR>>>> > > > plan
to<BR>>>> > > go<BR>>>> > > > to war and when
9/11 happened that's what they did; they went to<BR>>>> > >
> 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>><BR>>>>
> > > wrote:<BR>>>> > > ><BR>>>> > >
> > I am glad that you say "if". Regardless of that is is
ridiculous<BR>>>> > > > > to<BR>>>> > >
assert<BR>>>> > > > > that it may have been planed by
anyone in the Bush<BR>>>> > > > > administration.
To<BR>>>> > > say<BR>>>> > > > > some
heads should have rolled may be appropriate , but hind sight<BR>>>>
> > > > is<BR>>>> > > 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<BR>>>> > > happen,<BR>>>> > > > > >
except insofar as he was incompetent. And the historical facts<BR>>>>
> > > > > in my<BR>>>> > > post<BR>>>>
> > > > > are accurate. Name one fact in the post you responded
to that<BR>>>> > > > > > 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<BR>>>> > > > > > against the<BR>>>>
> > US<BR>>>> > > > > to<BR>>>> > >
> > > promote the agenda of the "Project for the New
American<BR>>>> > > > > > Century"<BR>>>>
> > (Cheney<BR>>>> > > > > and<BR>>>> >
> > > > Rumsfeld supported this project) which is rather explicit
in<BR>>>> > > documents<BR>>>> > > > >
> noting that a "new Pearl Harbor" would provide the<BR>>>> >
> > > > justification for<BR>>>> > >
an<BR>>>> > > > > > expansion of US military hegemony,
President W. Bush would<BR>>>> > > > > >
likely<BR>>>> > > have<BR>>>> > > > >
been<BR>>>> > > > > > a figure head, not a planner of
such malfeasance, and likely<BR>>>> > > > > > kept
out<BR>>>> > > of<BR>>>> > > > >
the<BR>>>> > > > > > loop.<BR>>>> > >
> > ><BR>>>> > > > > > Some think that Cheney
was more president, in reality, than<BR>>>> > > > > >
Bush<BR>>>> > > 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>><BR>>>>
> > wrote:<BR>>>> > > > > ><BR>>>> >
> > > > > Your history is distorted. Bush did not allow 9/11 to
happen<BR>>>> > > anymore<BR>>>> > > > >
than<BR>>>> > > > > > > FDR allowed Pearl Harbor to
happen( I am not a fan of<BR>>>> > > > > > >
either). On<BR>>>> > > Pearl<BR>>>> > > >
> > > Harbor the Japanese code was broken and a message was
sent<BR>>>> > > > > > > out.<BR>>>> >
> 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<BR>>>> > > > > > >
Show<BR>>>> > > > > > > PromotesClaim of 9/11
Cover-up[<BR>>>> > > > > > ><BR>>>> >
> > > > > > President Bush's August briefing before 9/11
explicitly<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
stated<BR>>>> > > "Bin<BR>>>> > > > >
Laden<BR>>>> > > > > > > > determined to strike
in US."<BR>>>> > > > > > > ><BR>>>>
> > > > > > > I question the theory that the 9/11 attacks
and the<BR>>>> > > > > > > > collapse
of<BR>>>> > > the<BR>>>> > > > > > >
> buildings involved was orchestrated by agents of the US.<BR>>>>
> > > > > > > But the<BR>>>> > > > >
theory<BR>>>> > > > > > > > that 9/11 was
"allowed" to happen, that there was<BR>>>> > > > > >
> > substantial<BR>>>> > > > >
evidence<BR>>>> > > > > > > that<BR>>>>
> > > > > > > terrorists were going to strike the US, but
the aggressive<BR>>>> > > actions<BR>>>> > >
> > > > required<BR>>>> > > > > > >
> to stop the attack were deliberately avoided, is
possible,<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
given<BR>>>> > > that<BR>>>> > > > >
the<BR>>>> > > > > > > > neo-con "Project for
the New American Century" explicitly<BR>>>> > > > > >
> > stated<BR>>>> > > in<BR>>>> > > >
> > > military<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
think tank analysis prior to 9/11 ("Rebuilding America's<BR>>>> >
> Defenses:<BR>>>> > > > > > >
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>
),<BR>>>> > > > > > > that a<BR>>>> >
> > > > > > "new Pearl Harbor" would provide the
justification for the<BR>>>> > > 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<BR>>>> > > > > >
> > to<BR>>>> > > stop<BR>>>> > > >
> the<BR>>>> > > > > > > 9/11<BR>>>>
> > > > > > > attacks, reveals gross incompetence, if not
a deliberate<BR>>>> > > conspiracy<BR>>>> > >
> > to<BR>>>> > > > > > > > exploit a
major terror attack against the US as a "new<BR>>>> > > >
> > > > Pearl<BR>>>> > > Harbor"<BR>>>>
> > > > to<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
expand US military/economic hegemony. Cheney and Rumsfeld<BR>>>> >
> > > > > > signed<BR>>>> > >
the<BR>>>> > > > > > > > "Statement of
Principles" for the "Project for the New<BR>>>> > > > >
> > > American<BR>>>> > > > >
Century"<BR>>>> > > > > > > in<BR>>>> >
> > > > > > 1997 (<BR>>>> > > <A
href="http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm">http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm</A>).<BR>>>>
> > > > > > It is<BR>>>> > > > > >
> > no surprise they assumed positions of great power in
the<BR>>>> > > > > > > > second<BR>>>>
> > Bush<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
administration, given the agenda to expand US<BR>>>> > > >
> > > > military/economic<BR>>>> > > > >
hegemony<BR>>>> > > > > > > was<BR>>>>
> > > > > > > planned well in advance, if they could gain
the White House<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
back.<BR>>>> > > > > > > ><BR>>>> >
> > > > > > I won't continue a history lesson here (the two
websites<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
below<BR>>>> > > offer<BR>>>> > > > >
a<BR>>>> > > > > > > > critical analysis of 9/11
orthodoxy). But there are very<BR>>>> > > > > > >
> serious<BR>>>> > > > > > >
questions<BR>>>> > > > > > > > that can be
raised regarding why more aggressive steps were<BR>>>> > > >
> > > > not<BR>>>> > > taken<BR>>>> >
> > > to<BR>>>> > > > > > > > stop the
9/11 plot, given the information we know the US<BR>>>> > >
government<BR>>>> > > > > > > > possessed
regarding the plans for a terror attack on the<BR>>>> > > >
> > > > US, who<BR>>>> > > > >
might<BR>>>> > > > > > > carry<BR>>>> >
> > > > > > out such an attack, and that use of commercial
aircraft as<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
terror<BR>>>> > > > > weapons<BR>>>> > >
> > > > > was known prior to 9/11 as a likely method.
Bush<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
administration<BR>>>> > > > > national<BR>>>>
> > > > > > > security advisor Condoleeza Rice was either
woefully<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
uninformed,<BR>>>> > > > > which I<BR>>>> >
> > > > > > doubt given her intelligence, or engaging in
"spin"<BR>>>> > > > > > > > propaganda
to<BR>>>> > > > > hide<BR>>>> > > >
> > > the<BR>>>> > > > > > > > tracks
of Bush administration failures regarding the 9/11<BR>>>> > >
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">http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO405E.html</A><BR>>>>
> > > > > > ><BR>>>> > > > > >
> > ---------------------<BR>>>> > > > > > >
><BR>>>> > > > > > ><BR>>>> > >
> ><BR>>>> > ><BR>>>> > > <A
href="http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?the_post-9/11_world=denials&timeline=complete_911_timeline">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<BR>>>> > > Condoleezza<BR>>>> > > > >
> > > Rice<<BR>>>> > > > > >
><BR>>>> > ><BR>>>> > > <A
href="http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a051602rice#a051602rice">http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a051602rice#a051602rice</A><BR>>>>
> > > > ><BR>>>> > > > > > > >
[image: Edit event]<<BR>>>> > > > > >
><BR>>>> > > > ><BR>>>> >
><BR>>>> > > <A
href="http://www.historycommons.org/eventedit.jsp?oid=1626004942-36209&drafts=null&timeline=complete_911_timeline">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<BR>>>> > > > > > > > what
Bush<BR>>>> > > > > knew<BR>>>> > > >
> > > and<BR>>>> > > > > > > > when in
her May 16, 2002 press conference.]National<BR>>>> > > >
> > > > Security<BR>>>> > > Adviser<BR>>>>
> > > > Rice<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
tries to explain what Bush knew and when in her May 16,<BR>>>> >
> > > > > > 2002<BR>>>> > >
press<BR>>>> > > > > > > > conference. *[Source:
CNN]*National Security Adviser<BR>>>> > > > > > >
> Condoleezza<BR>>>> > > Rice<BR>>>> > > >
> > > > states, “I don’t think anybody could have predicted
that<BR>>>> > > > > > > > these<BR>>>>
> > people<BR>>>> > > > > > >
would<BR>>>> > > > > > > > take an airplane and
slam it into the World Trade Center,<BR>>>> > > > > >
> > take<BR>>>> > > > > another<BR>>>>
> > > > > > one<BR>>>> > > > > >
> > and slam it into the Pentagon, that they would try to
use<BR>>>> > > > > > > > an<BR>>>> >
> airplane<BR>>>> > > > > as<BR>>>> > >
> > > > a<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
missile,” adding that “even in retrospect” there was<BR>>>> > >
> > > > > “nothing” to<BR>>>> > > > >
suggest<BR>>>> > > > > > > > that. [White
House,<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
5/16/2002<<BR>>>> > > > > > ><BR>>>>
> > > ><BR>>>> > ><BR>>>> > > <A
href="http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/05/20020516-13.html">http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/05/20020516-13.html</A><BR>>>>
> > > > > > ><BR>>>> > > > > >
> > ] Contradicting Rice’s claims, former CIA Deputy
Director<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
John<BR>>>> > > Gannon<BR>>>> > > > > >
> > acknowledges that such a scenario has long been
taken<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
seriously<BR>>>> > > by US<BR>>>> > > > >
> > > intelligence: “If you ask anybody could terrorists
convert<BR>>>> > > > > > > > a<BR>>>>
> > plane<BR>>>> > > > > into a<BR>>>>
> > > > > > > missile? [N]obody would have ruled that
out.” Rice also<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
states,<BR>>>> > > “The<BR>>>> > > > >
> > > overwhelming bulk of the evidence was that this was
an<BR>>>> > > > > > > > attack<BR>>>>
> > that<BR>>>> > > > > was<BR>>>> >
> > > > > > likely to take place overseas.” [MSNBC,
5/17/2002] Slate<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
awards<BR>>>> > > Rice<BR>>>> > > > >
the<BR>>>> > > > > > > > “Whopper of the Week”
when the title of Bush’s August 6<BR>>>> > > > > >
> > briefing<BR>>>> > > is<BR>>>> > > >
> > > > revealed: “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US.”
[Slate,<BR>>>> > > > > > > > 5/23/2002<<A
href="http://slate.msn.com/?id=2066154">http://slate.msn.com/?id=2066154</A>><BR>>>>
> > > > > > > ] Rice later will concede that “somebody
did imagine it”<BR>>>> > > > > > > > but
will<BR>>>> > > 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<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >
you<BR>>>> > > have<BR>>>> > > > >
the<BR>>>> > > > > > > U.S.<BR>>>> >
> > > > > > > government arming Osama and the CIA
enabling drug<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >
trafficking<BR>>>> > > 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<BR>>>> > > > > > > > > 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<BR>>>>
> > > > > > > > than<BR>>>> > > >
> trust of<BR>>>> > > > > > >
the<BR>>>> > > > > > > > > government.
Generally, the system works well enough that<BR>>>> > > >
> > > > > you<BR>>>> > > can<BR>>>>
> > > > at<BR>>>> > > > > > >
least<BR>>>> > > > > > > > > have some faith
in a contract, and some hope the police<BR>>>> > > > >
> > > > will<BR>>>> > > > > respond
if<BR>>>> > > > > > > you<BR>>>> > >
> > > > > > call them. I wouldn't want to be the guy that
happened<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >
across<BR>>>> > > some<BR>>>> > > > > >
> > > confidential documents or saw the wrong thing go down
at<BR>>>> > > > > > > > > the<BR>>>>
> > 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<BR>>>> >
> > > > > > >> any<BR>>>> > >
faith<BR>>>> > > > > in<BR>>>> > > >
> > > these<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
>> wild stories? While, I don't agree with 9/11 being an<BR>>>>
> > > > > > > >> inside<BR>>>> > >
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<BR>>>> >
> > > > > > >> national<BR>>>> > >
level,<BR>>>> > > > > but<BR>>>> > > >
> > > more<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
>> importantly at the local levels as well. For
instance,<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>
does<BR>>>> > > anyone<BR>>>> > > > > >
> living in<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>
Northern Idaho really think the "boys in Boise" even<BR>>>> > >
> > > > > >> care<BR>>>> > >
about<BR>>>> > > > > North<BR>>>> > > >
> > > > >> Idaho?<BR>>>> > > > > >
> > >> If they feel that way, why? Does anyone trust
an<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>
employment<BR>>>> > > > > contract<BR>>>> >
> > > > > or<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
>> retirement contract with the U of I? If not, why? Can<BR>>>>
> > > > > > > >> you<BR>>>> > >
trust<BR>>>> > > > > that<BR>>>> > > >
> > > the<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>
speed limits on our county roads are legitimate? If not,<BR>>>> >
> > > > > > >> why?<BR>>>> > > >
> > > > >><BR>>>> > > > > > >
> >><BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>
Distrust of "government",once it starts, is hard to turn<BR>>>> >
> 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<BR>>>> > > > >
> > > >> is in<BR>>>> > > the<BR>>>>
> > > > light<BR>>>> > > > > > >
of<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >> those
perceptions that people live, not in light of the<BR>>>> > >
> > > > > >> truth<BR>>>> > >
or<BR>>>> > > > > > > falsity of<BR>>>>
> > > > > > > >> an issue.<BR>>>> >
> > > > > > >><BR>>>> > > > >
> > > >><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<BR>>>> > > > >
> > > >> government<BR>>>> > > > > >
> cover-up<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
regarding the facts of 9/11.<BR>>>> > > > > > >
> >>> There is a radio show that has a large following
that<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
has<BR>>>> > > been<BR>>>> > > > >
on<BR>>>> > > > > > > the<BR>>>> > >
> > > > > >>> air for years, that I have listened to
numerous times<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
on<BR>>>> > > > > shortwave,<BR>>>> > >
> > > > that is<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
>>> very political but in some ways hard to stereotype.
I<BR>>>> > > suppose<BR>>>> > > > >
you<BR>>>> > > > > > > could<BR>>>> >
> > > > > > >>> call it hard core libertarian (they
passionately<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
promoted Ron<BR>>>> > > > > Paul's<BR>>>> >
> > > > > > >>> presidential bid), which means that
it is very<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
distrustful of<BR>>>> > > > > > > government
in<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>> a
consistent aggressive way that many traditional<BR>>>> > >
"mainstream"<BR>>>> > > > > > >
conservatives<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
are not. Anti-abortion views are expressed, which fits<BR>>>> >
> > > > > > >>> the<BR>>>> > > >
> current<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
Republican agenda, but there are two issues that have<BR>>>> >
> received a<BR>>>> > > > > lot<BR>>>> >
> > > > > of air<BR>>>> > > > > > >
> >>> time where the show has argued for
government<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
cover-ups, Gulf<BR>>>> > > War<BR>>>> > > >
> > > Syndrome<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
>>> among vets, and 9/11. This show aggressively
attacked<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
the<BR>>>> > > Bush<BR>>>> > > > > >
> > >>> administration, and is doing the same to Obama's.
Main<BR>>>> > > website<BR>>>> > > > >
for<BR>>>> > > > > > > this<BR>>>> >
> > > > > > >>> radio show:<BR>>>> >
> > > > > > >>> <A
href="http://www.thepowerhour.com/">http://www.thepowerhour.com/</A><BR>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>
---------------------------------------------<BR>>>> > > >
> > > > >>> The following documentary described at the
website<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
below,<BR>>>> > > > > promoted by<BR>>>> >
> > > > > > >>> "The Power Hour," pulls no punches
regarding what it<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
>>> claims<BR>>>> > > was<BR>>>> > >
> > "a<BR>>>> > > > > > >
massive<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
cover-up" regarding 9/11:<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
>>> <A
href="http://www.thepowermall.com/">http://www.thepowermall.com/</A><BR>>>>
> > > > > > > >>> *911 In Plane
Site<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
>>><BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
*New* "The Directors Cut" *with *"More Footage - More<BR>>>> >
> 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<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>> Site,"
we<BR>>>> > > were<BR>>>> > > > >
able<BR>>>> > > > > > > to<BR>>>> >
> > > > > > >>> collect mountains of new footage
and photographs from<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
>>> sources<BR>>>> > > all<BR>>>> > >
> > > > over the<BR>>>> > > > > > >
> >>> world. We can now say, without a shadow of doubt,
that<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
we<BR>>>> > > have<BR>>>> > > > > >
> undeniable<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
>>> evidence of a massive cover-up. From the 16 ft. hole
in<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
the<BR>>>> > > outer<BR>>>> > > > > >
> walls of<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
the Pentagon to the news reports of bombs, explosions<BR>>>> >
> > > > > > >>> and<BR>>>> > > >
> potential<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
demolition of World Trade Centers 1, 2 and 7, to the<BR>>>> > >
> > > > > >>> strange<BR>>>> > > >
> > > attachment on<BR>>>> > > > > > >
> >>> the bottom of Flight 175 and the mysterious
flashes<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>> caught
on<BR>>>> > > > > > > videotape by<BR>>>>
> > > > > > > >>> at least five separate
sources, it is clear - 911 was<BR>>>> > > > > > >
> >>> an<BR>>>> > > inside<BR>>>> >
> > > job.<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
>>><BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
From Dave vonKleist, co-host of The Power Hour radio<BR>>>> > >
> > > > > >>> program<BR>>>> > >
and<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
writer/producer of the album "Will Someone Listen" &<BR>>>> >
> > > > > > >>> William<BR>>>> > >
> > Lewis,<BR>>>> > > > > > >
producer<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>> of
"American Freedom News", "TruNews" and<BR>>>> > > > >
> > > >>> producer/writer of<BR>>>> > >
the<BR>>>> > > > > > > album<BR>>>> >
> > > > > > >>> "Police State" comes a full length
documentary exposing<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
>>> one<BR>>>> > > of<BR>>>> > > >
> the<BR>>>> > > > > > > largest<BR>>>>
> > > > > > > >>> conspiracies ever uncovered.
With the pounding force of<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
>>> a<BR>>>> > > > > > > sledgehammer
you<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>> will find
yourself horrified and astonished at the<BR>>>> > > > >
> > > >>> shear<BR>>>> > > scope
of<BR>>>> > > > > the<BR>>>> > > > >
> > > >>> largest transgressions ever carried out against
the<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>> people
of<BR>>>> > > 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<BR>>>> > >
> > > > > >>> Texas<BR>>>> > > >
> > > > >>> governor said to Glenn Beck that she was
still<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>> looking
at<BR>>>> > > the<BR>>>> > > > > > >
> >>> evidence for a 9-11 cover-up. Beck's response
was<BR>>>> > > something<BR>>>> > > > >
like<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>> "We'd
better look at another candidate!" Yes the<BR>>>> > > > >
> > > >>> Tea<BR>>>> > >
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>>>>
> > > > > > > >>> <<A
href="mailto:vision2020-bounces@moscow.com">mailto:vision2020-bounces@moscow.com</A>>
on behalf of<BR>>>> > > Garrett<BR>>>> > > >
> > > Clevenger<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
>>> Sent: Fri 3/12/2010 11:36 AM<BR>>>> > > > >
> > > >>> To: <A
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>>>>
> > > > > > <<A
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:vision2020@moscow.com</A>><BR>>>>
> > > > > > > >>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020]
teabaggers<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
>>><BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
"I have yet to see you, Tom, Nick or Wayne comment<BR>>>> > >
> > > > > >>> on<BR>>>> > >
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.<BR>>>> > >
> > > > > >>> Some<BR>>>> > > > >
> > > >>> far-righters think there is a greater
conspiracy<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
relating<BR>>>> > > to<BR>>>> > > > > >
> > >>> that, too.<BR>>>> > > > > >
> > >>><BR>>>> > > > > > > >
>>><BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>> I
don't think it's a stretch, though, to assume GWB<BR>>>> > >
> > > > > >>> used<BR>>>> > >
911<BR>>>> > > > > to<BR>>>> > > > >
> > > >>> advance an agenda they had been planning on for
a<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
while<BR>>>> > > (the<BR>>>> > > > > >
> > >>> PATRIOT act, invading Iraq, etc)<BR>>>> >
> > > > > > >>><BR>>>> > > > >
> > > >>><BR>>>> > > > > > > >
>>> That makes GWB look suspicious, especially<BR>>>> >
> > > > > > >>> considering<BR>>>> >
> some of<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
the discrepancies surrounding the 911 commission,<BR>>>> > >
> > > > > >>> which<BR>>>> > >
Bush<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>> initially
was against.<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
>>><BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
It's also suspicious that that Bush and Cheney both<BR>>>> > >
refused to<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
testify under oath to the 911 commission.<BR>>>> > > > >
> > > >>><BR>>>> > > > > > > >
>>><BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
Until someone looks at the arguments the 911<BR>>>> > > >
> > > > >>> truthers are<BR>>>> > > >
> > > > >>> conveying (and there is lots of
interesting<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
arguments in<BR>>>> > > their<BR>>>> > > >
> > > > >>> favor) you probably shouldn't be condemning
what<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>> they
say.<BR>>>> > > > > > > >
>>><BR>>>> > > > > > > >
>>><BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>> I
have no idea what the truth is, but I do know that<BR>>>> > >
powerful<BR>>>> > > > > > > > >>>
people are in control and do despicable things to<BR>>>> > >
> > > > > >>> 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>>>> > ><BR>>>>
><BR>>>> ><BR>>><BR>><BR>><BR>>
=======================================================<BR>> List services
made available by First Step Internet,<BR>> serving the communities of the
Palouse since 1994.<BR>> <A
href="http://www.fsr.net">http://www.fsr.net</A><BR>> <A
href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>>
=======================================================<BR>><BR><BR>=======================================================<BR> List
services made available by First Step Internet, <BR> serving the
communities of the Palouse since 1994.
<BR>
<A
href="http://www.fsr.net">http://www.fsr.net</A>
<BR> <A
href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>=======================================================</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>