9/11 - The Inside Job **NEW INFO & UPDATES WHEN THEY HAPPEN**

[GazeboflossUK]

 

Rockefeller Predicted "Event" To Trigger War Eleven Months Before 9/11

Hollywood director Russo recalls remarkable "forecast" of coming attack

 

October 28 2006

 

Hollywood director and documentary film maker Aaron Russo, currently receiving a wave of plaudits for his latest release, America: From Freedom to Fascism, told The Alex Jones Show that Nicholas Rockefeller had personally assured him there was going to be an "event" that would trigger the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq eleven months before 9/11 took place.

 

Saying he had been approached many times by the Rockefellers and other members of the CFR elite in an attempt to recruit him, Russo recalled a conversation that would come home to roost on September 11, 2001.

 

"Here's what I do know first hand - I know that about eleven months to a year before 9/11 ever happened I was talking to my Rockefeller friend (Nicholas Rockefeller) and he said to me 'Aaron there's gonna be an event' and he never told me what the event was going to be - I'm not sure he knew what the event was going to be I don't know that he knew that," said Russo.

 

Russo related how Rockefeller knew precisely what the event would lead to and which countries would be militarily targeted by the elite.

 

"He just said there's gonna be an event and out of that event we're gonna invade Afghanistan so we can run pipelines through the Caspian sea, we can go into Iraq to take the oil and establish bases in the middle east and to make the middle east part of the new world order and we're going to go after Venezuela - that's what's going to come out of this event."

 

"Eleven months to a year later that's what happened....he certainly knew that something was going to happen."

 

"In my relationships with some of these people I can tell you that it's as evil as it really gets - this is it - this is the game," stated Russo - also relating how members of the elite were routinely obsessed by creating a world identification society where people had to carry ID cards and prove who they were at all times.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Launch of Aaron Russo's From Freedom to Fascism on DVD!

Neither left- nor right-wing, this startling examination exposes the systematic erosion of civil liberties in America, the federal reserve scam and the plan to track and trace the movements of every US citizen.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

Rockefeller also told Russo that the elite families created and financed the women's lib movement so they could tax another half of the population and so that the children would be trained by them in government schools rather than in the context of the family unit.

 

Russo also sounded off on 9/11, openly airing his view for the first time that it was a complete inside job.

 

"People know that 9/11 was an inside job," said Russo, "look what they did here in America, look at 9/11, look what they did - they killed thousands of Americans - people jumping out of windows from a hundred floors up - they don't care," said the director.

 

"There's no way that Building 7 came down without a controlled demolition, it takes weeks to do the controlled demolition, they couldn't have done it in a few hours like Larry Silverstein said - it blows the whole game - concrete doesn't turn to powder unless its exploded."

 

"We all know that 9/11 was a fraud - an inside job," concluded Russo.

[GazeboflossUK]

 

Will Doubletree Hotel Video Show Pentagon Impact?

Conflicting stories make it unclear, yet there are certainly more tapes to come

 

Steve Watson

Infowars.net

Friday, November 3, 2006

 

Rumours have begun circulating today that a video due to be released in one week's time, just prior to the midterm elections, will show clear and crisp footage of American Airlines flight 77 hitting the Pentagon on September 11th 2001.

 

Such a release may sway uncertain voters into sticking with the devils they know rather than the devils they don't as far as the "protection" of America against Al Qaeda goes.

 

The video in question is the Doubletree hotel video, which government watchdog/ sometime propaganda outlet Judicial Watch says has been promised to them on November 9th.

 

9/11 Blog site Killtown states:

 

"So how much do you want to bet that this Doubletree Hotel security video will be released before this Tuesday (election day) to ’shock & awe’ the voters in hopes to sway the elections, especially if this video finally shows a plane hitting the Pentagon?”

 

In answer to this question, prolific Blogger Kurt Nimmo states:

 

"If I was a betting man, I’d bet the farm on it."

 

I wouldn't be so sure.

 

There are conflicting and confusing stories as to whether the Doubletree video shows anything at all. The FBI, in response to a FOIA request to release all tapes of the Pentagon on 9/11, has stated to attorney Scott Hodes, representative of Mr Scott Bingham who runs the website www.flight77.info, that the Doubletree hotel video did not capture the impact:

 

 

The same statement also made it clear that the Citgo gas station tape also did not capture anything. This statement was apparently proven to be true last month when that video was released.

 

It remains a mystery why the FBI confiscated the gas station and hotel security videos within minutes of the crash and why they did not release these videos for five years, given that they say they show nothing.

 

Two conflicting stories muddy the waters on this issue however.

 

According to a CNN FOIA request of 2002, a nearby hotel's video DID capture the impact. The following exchange is from a CNN transcript of a report on the 2002 release of the original "parking lot" footage, the four grainy video frames:

 

MCINTYRE (on camera): These pictures are the first to be made public, but they are not the only images of the plane hitting the Pentagon. Sources tell CNN that the FBI on September 11th confiscated a nearby hotel's security camera videotape, which also captured the attack. So far, the Justice Department has refused to release that videotape. Aaron.

 

BROWN: Why? Do we have any idea why they won't release it?

 

MCINTYRE: Well, the claim - we have filed a freedom of information request for it. They claim that it might provide some intelligence to somebody else who might want to do harm to the United States. But officials I talked to here at the Pentagon say they don't see any national security or criminal value to that tape. The FBI tends to hold on to things. But the government may eventually release that tape, and if they do, we'll bring it to you.

 

Furthermore, a story by Bill Gertz and Rowan Scarborough that appeared in the Washington Times 10 days after 9/11 backed up this claim, pointing out that hotel staff had sat watching the video surveillance in horror before the FBI arrived and shut down the scene:

 

A security camera atop a hotel close to the Pentagon may have captured dramatic footage of the hijacked Boeing 757 airliner as it slammed into the western wall of the Pentagon. Hotel employees sat watching the film in shock and horror several times before the FBI confiscated the video as part of its investigation. It may be the only video available of the attack. The Pentagon has told broadcast news reporters that its security cameras did not capture the crash. The attack occurred close to the Pentagon’s heliport, an area that normally would be under 24-hour security surveillance, including video monitoring.

 

The confusion mounts as there are suggestions that this video may not be the Doubletree video but a tape taken from cameras at the Sheraton National Hotel which overlooks I395 and the Pentagon, and has a clear view of the impact zone.

 

 

The FBI says, however, that there is no Sheraton video in existence. So which is it to be? Does a hotel video capture the impact or doesn't it? Was Gertz simply making his story up about the hotel staff seeing the video? And if the FBI is telling the truth about the Sheraton Hotel then why did the Sheraton, a major building in the area, not have any cameras in operation?

 

Whichever story you believe, whether the footage does or does not show the impact, the fact that the footage exists is not denied. So something does not tally up here.

 

The FBI further admits that it has a total of 85 video tapes seized on 9/11 from businesses and traffic poles in the area. It is maintained that only the previously released parking lot footage shows the impact. How unlikely is it that out of another 84 confirmed surveillance tapes directed at the building, none of them captured anything?

 

I predict that if the Doubletree video shows anything at all it will only serve to bolster the straw man argument and further hype up the debate over what actually hit the Pentagon on 9/11.

 

 

As Killtown points out:

 

"if this video does indeed show a plane flying into the Pentagon, it will not actually show the plane hit, but in fact will show it disappear behind the Pentagon’s west wall (see aerial photo above) and then a fireball will obviously be seen coming up over the roof. This will be very similar to what was seen with the first video of the 2nd WTC crash shown “live” on TV which shows a plane (with no discernible markings) come across the screen and disappear behind the North Tower (which is blocking the view of the South Tower) and then a fireball is seen erupting from the other side.

 

In this sense the video would fit right into the ludicrous "no planer" theories which suggests that planes hitting the WTC towers were CGI edited into TV footage. This would then further stir debates about no plane hitting the Pentagon.

 

Unanswered questions need to be explored, but the Pentagon issue must not become the core focus of the 9/11 truth movement. There is evidence that suggests a 757 hit the Pentagon, there is evidence that suggests something else hit the Pentagon. What is not in doubt, however, is that whatever it was, it was not flown by a man who didn't know his way around the inside of single engine cessna and was described by his former flight instructors as "A weak student who was wasting resources."

 

The danger is clearly that the government will use its media mouthpieces in particular Fox News to hype the Pentagon issue until it becomes the de facto keystone of alternative explanations behind 9/11. At the point when that crescendo reaches its peak crystal clear footage of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon (whether real or faked) will be released, knocking down the straw man argument that the establishment itself erected.

 

The media obsession with this one facet of an entire smorgasbord of 9/11 questions, and their refusal to address more hardcore 9/11 evidence, leads us to fear that this is the case.

 

We need to concentrate on the concrete facts that point towards a cover up of complicity and not on wild speculation that will only hinder the movement as a whole.

[GazeboflossUK]

 

Pentagon 9/11 Video Being Held Back by FBI

Government says it needs "more time" before releasing a video that shows nothing

 

Steve Watson

Infowars.net

Tuesday, November 7, 2006

 

The FBI has further delayed the release of a video that many bloggers have speculated may show the impact of flight 77 into the Pentagon on September 11th 2001.

 

Following last week's article detailing the imminent release of the Doubletree hotel video, a reader has informed us that after calling Judicial Watch and asking when the video would be made public, he was told:

 

'The Government said they needed more time'. When asked when enough time would pass before they could release the tape, they said they didn't know and it was indefinite...

 

Judicial Watch had previously announced that the video would be released before November the ninth and even speculated that it may be used as a political tool in order to sway mid-term election votes.

 

Ongoing FOIA requests and subsequent lawsuits should now have forced all known video tapes of the Pentagon attack out into the open. It seems that abiding by judicial law is something that the FBI refuses to be a part of however.

 

Judicial Watch Director of Investigations & Research and former military intelligence officer Chris Farrell, previously appearing on the Alex Jones show, agreed that the DoD only released the original Pentagon parking lot tape back in May 2006 because they wanted to for their own reasons. We have witnessed numerous times over the government claim national security in refusing to release evidence and they could have done the same in this instance yet they deliberately chose to relent and release the new tapes.

 

Why does the government need more time to release a video that is admitted by the FBI, under penalty of perjury, to show absolutely nothing? What are they cooking up? If they are not cooking anything up why are they flouting the law by refusing to release this and the other 83 tapes?

 

 

We have previously documented our concerns that the Pentagon issue may be used as a honey pot trap to bait 9/11 truthers into a distracting debate over what hit the building, deflecting attention away from the fact that whatever it was was allowed through the air defenses and performed incredible high speed military style maneuvers that even crack fighter pilots would find near impossible.

 

We can nip this baited trap in the bud by once again demanding the release of all videos they admit they have in their possession. We can then re-focus on demanding plausible explanations as to how the air defenses were bypassed at every stage and as to what brought the buildings down, including a 47 story building that was not attacked.

 

ACTION: Email and call Judicial Watch and demand they follow up on their promise to get the Doubletree and the other 83 videos released as per their ongoing lawsuit.

[GazeboflossUK]

 

New Bond Film Highlights 9/11 Insider Trading

Fails to mention it led straight back to the CIA, was not investigated by 9/11 Commission

 

Steve Watson

Infowars.net

Monday, November 20, 2006

 

In a twenty first century update, the new James Bond Movie, Casino Royale, directly references 9/11 and highlights the fact that massive manipulation of airline stocks prior to the attacks account for a leading motive behind the event.

 

The movie, based on the original 1953 novel, has been updated with a terrorism plotline in which the bad guy, Le Chiffre, is a banker to the world's terrorists and in order to stop him, and bring down the terrorist network, Bond must beat Le Chiffre in a $150 million poker game at the Casino Royale.

 

The movie contains a significant reference to 9/11 when M, the fictional head of MI6, tells Bond the following:

 

"When they analyzed the stock market after 9/11 the CIA discovered there had been massive shorting of airline stocks. When the stocks hit bottom on 9/12, somebody made a fortune."

 

In the film, Bond prevents the same thing happening again with the Boeing stock, by thwarting the bombing of an airbus prototype plane at Miami airport. With their prototype destroyed the company would have been near bankruptcy. Instead, someone (we later discover it's Le Chiffre) loses over a hundred million dollars betting the wrong way as Bond foils the plot.

 

As has been extensively reported over the past five years, multiple sources of criminal insider trading were discovered after 9/11, indicating that many different parties had prior knowledge of the attacks.

 

The most significant instances of this however, and ones obviously not revealed in the Bond film, are the CIA and FBI linked cases that indicate the intelligence services, at best had prior knowledge of the attacks, and at worst were involved in their orchestration.

 

The London Independent among others reported that the firm used to buy many of the "put" options – where a trader, in effect, bets on a share price fall – on United Airlines stock was headed until 1998 by "Buzzy" Krongard, at the time the executive director of the CIA.

 

 

Until 1997, Mr Krongard was chairman of Alex Brown Inc, America's oldest investment banking firm. Alex Brown was acquired by Bankers Trust, which in turn was bought by Deutsche Bank. His last post before resigning to take his senior role in the CIA was to head Bankers Trust – Alex Brown's private client business, dealing with the accounts and investments of wealthy customers around the world.

 

Other publications reported similar stories concerning FBI personnel.

 

On the one hand it is quite surprising to see that such a reference to the shorting of airline stocks made it into the Bond movie, primarily because the 9/11 Commission spectacularly omitted it from their investigation into the attacks.

 

One would think that any investigation would attempt to follow the money as it were, to trace the funding of and profits made from the attack in an attempt to discover the perpetrators. Apparently not in this case.

 

The Commission also failed to look into the fact that the head of the Pakistani Intelligence agency, General Mahmoud Ahmed, wired $100,000 to the lead hijacker, Mohammed Atta, in the days before 9/11. Ahmed was having breakfast on the morning of 9/11 with Porter Goss, the head of the House Intelligence Committee and the next head of the CIA.

 

Is the 9/11 reference a simple plot device in the Casino Royale? Is it an attempt by the script writers to further blow the whistle on the insider trading? Or is it an attempt to steam valve the information, to mix fiction with reality and thus confuse the two?

 

In another item of interest to Infowars readers, the film, on general release now, also features Bond being "chipped" with a tracking device in his forearm, which at one point saves his life.

[GazeboflossUK]

 

Firefighter Describes "Molten Metal" at Ground Zero, like a "Foundry"

 

Video of New York firefighter describing seeing molten "steel" flowing at ground zero after 9/11 has emerged. He states that it was like a 'foundry' or "lava in a volcano"...........

This is an extremely important piece of footage because it really highlights the fact that something other than jet fuel fires, or in the case of building 7, office material fires, was responsible for the collapse of the buildings.

 

There are actaully lots of accounts alleging that rescue workers encountered molten steel.

 

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3060923273573302287&sourceid=docidfeed&hl=en

The firefighter in this video specifically says the steel was flowing.

 

Molten steel was found “three, four, and five weeks later, when the rubble was being removed [from WTCs 1 & 2],” Mark Loizeaux, president of Controlled Demolition, Inc. (CDI) of Phoenix, Maryland is on record as saying. He said molten steel was also found at 7 WTC, which collapsed mysteriously in the late afternoon.

 

What caused the steel to melt? How did it stay molten for weeks after the collapses? How did fires in the WTC wreckage manage to burn for more than three months?

 

Molten metal found in the basement of the WTC suggests that the commonly used explosive thermite may be responsible for the collapse.

The use of thermite and thermate is also common in military circles.

 

 

Thermite devices can be set off at will using thermite electrical matches commonly used for controlled demolitions. There's also evidence of the dark grey thermite residue on recovered steel columns from the towers.

 

 

Also, when cutting through super strength steel beams diagonal 'shaped charges' are used to slice them and cause the section above to literally slide off. Evidence of this type of cutting can also be seen at ground zero.

 

 

^^^ Angled "shaped charge" on a steel beam.

 

 

Also seen at the site in New York...

 

 

Thermite contains its own supply of oxygen, and does not require any external source such as air. Consequently, it cannot be smothered and may ignite in any environment, given sufficient initial heat. It will burn just as well while underwater, for example, and cannot even be extinguished with water, as water sprayed on a thermite reaction will instantly be boiled into steam.

 

In August 2006 the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) responded to questions of controlled demolition and thermite use by dismissing all the evidence outright in two incredible sentences. Firstly in response to the thermite theory:

 

"Analysis of the WTC steel for the elements in thermite/thermate would not necessarily have been conclusive. The metal compounds also would have been present in the construction materials making up the WTC towers, and sulfur is present in the gypsum wallboard that was prevalent in the interior partitions."

 

NIST also contend that the suggestion is irrelevant because they had already ruled out controlled demolition.

 

Secondly on the molten metal:

 

"The condition of the steel in the wreckage of the WTC towers (i.e., whether it was in a molten state or not) was irrelevant to the investigation of the collapse since it does not provide any conclusive information on the condition of the steel when the WTC towers were standing."

 

Oh OK, forget it then shall we?

 

Also, Now N.I.S.T say that they now could not rule out bombs in the buildings. Which was a real suprise admission.

[GazeboflossUK]

New 9/11 Pentagon video released, shows explosion and no plane

9/11 pentagon

 

NEW 9/11 Pentagon Video released from hotel

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4O4R0LWCQ4&eurl=

 

Saturday, December 2 - The CNN Wire

 

Hotel security video shows 9/11 Pentagon blast, but no plane

 

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A hotel security camera video released by the U.S. government showed the explosion that followed the crash of 'American Airlines Flight 77' into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001, but the low-quality recording did not capture an image of the 757 jetliner.

 

The video, recorded by a security camera at the Doubletree Hotel in Arlington, was released to public interest group Judicial Watch and others who filed a lawsuit seeking the tape and other videos from that day.

 

CNN filed a Freedom of Information request for the video in February 2002, after the manager of the hotel disclosed its existence to CNN Senior Pentagon Correspondent Jamie McIntyre and said it had been confiscated by the FBI. CNN's FOI request was denied because at the time the tape was considered evidence in the investigation of Zacarias Moussaoui, who has since been convicted.

 

There was speculation that this video might show the 'American Airlines 757' jetliner before it crashed, but a close examination by CNN only revealed the subsequent explosion and no image of the jet. The only known record of the plane is on images from the Pentagon security camera, first broadcast by CNN in March of 2002, and officially released in their entirety May of this year.

 

 

What I can't understand is what has this video got to do with the Moussaoui investigation.

It, yet again, doesn't even show a plane and hardly shows anything actually.

If a fucking plane hit just release the other 80+ tapes and let everyone see and stop hiding behind frigging "National Security".

 

http://www.pentagonresearch.com/video.html

[GazeboflossUK]

 

David Lynch Goes Public With 9/11 Questions

Film director is disturbed by unanswered questions

 

Infowars.net

Wednesday, December 6, 2006

 

Film Director and cult icon David Lynch has gone public with concerns he has over the official government story of the September 11 2001 terror attacks. Lynch has stated that he is disturbed by unanswered questions concerning the Pentagon attack, the collapse of the buildings in New York and the strange ending of flight 93 in Pennsylvania.

 

Appearing on Dutch Television on VPRO's Wereldgasten, on December 3rd, Lynch discussed and played clips from Dylan Avery's groundbreaking 9/11 documentary Loose Change.

 

After playing a four minute segment from the documentary Lynch stated:

 

"It's not so much what thy say, it's the things that make you look at what you thought you saw in a different light. And Those things for me, that bother me, is the hole in the Pentagon being too small for a plane, the lawn isn't messed up, and the government's not showing the plane hitting when many cameras photographed it.

 

At the World Trade Center, three buildings came down, like demolitions, and two of them were hit by a plane, but the third one they said "do you want us to pull it?" and they pulled it and it looked just like the other two. Those things bother me.

 

In Pennsylvania, the plane that went down, there was just a hole in the ground, there wasn't any wreckage,there wasn't any skid marks, there wasn't any tear in the earth, and no one has ever really found out about that.

 

So every place there's questions, coming from this documentary. You don't have to believe everything in the documentary to still have questions come up... and you look back and you remember what you saw, and what you were told, and now, you have questions.

 

It's just an event that has many questions and no answers."

 

When asked "What about suggestions the American government was behind it?", Lynch answered:

 

"That's too big for people to think about. it's too big. It's like something no one wants to think about."

 

Watch the video:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyVTkf8TnHc&eurl=

 

Lynch has directed well known cinematic classics such as Eraserhead, Dune, The Elephant Man and Mulholland Drive. He was also the creative force behind the Twin Peaks television series in the 80s. His films are synonymous with the questioning of the nature of reality and thinking outside the box. Often employing visually rich and surrealist stylistic elements, Lynch's works have become instantly recognizable to audiences worldwide and cemented his status as an underground hero for many.

 

Lynch's decision to make public his views is another encouraging sign that 9/11 truth and visualizations such as Loose Change are crossing the boundary between "the alternative" and the mainstream, permeating the collective consciousness of accessible culture, just as Lynch's work has done over the past four decades.

 

Lynch follows in the footsteps of other identifiable cultural figures who have spoken out on 9/11, such as Richard Linklater, Jesse Ventura, Matthew Bellemy, Ed Asner and Charlie Sheen.

[GazeboflossUK]

Radiation Hot Spots In NYC

 

'One alleged radiation hot spot on Manhattan's east side has the potential for becoming a political hot spot: A strong radiation spike from the area of the Israeli Embassy. Officials would not comment on why they thought that particular area allegedly showed such a stunning peak in radiation.'

 

http://www.halturnershow.com/RadiationHotSpotsInNYC.html

 

 

Were the towers blown up using low yield nuclear devices?

 

A bomb with a very low yield

 

Here is an article about the B61-11, a bomb with a very low yield, as low as 0.3 ton. Not saying THIS was the bomb used in 911, but just to point out that the government has been researching low-yield nuclear bombs for some time. The B61-7, from which the B61-11 was made, was first put into service in 1985. And the original B61 came into being in 1968.

 

 

 

http://www.thebulletin.org/article.php?art_ofn=mj97mello

 

A bomb for all reasons

 

The B61-7, from which the B61-11 is made, has a selectable yield ranging from 0.3 to about 340 kilotons. It was first placed in service in 1985. (The original B61 entered the stockpile in 1968.)

 

According to Chuck Hansen, one of the nation's leading independent authorities on the U.S. nuclear stockpile, the B61-7 can be fuzed for air or surface bursts, and it has "a hardened ground-penetrator nose" with a retarded contact-burst fuzing option. It can be dropped with or without a parachute.

 

William M. Arkin and Robert S. Norris of the Natural Resources Defense Council (and authors of the Bulletin's regular feature, the "NRDC Nuclear Notebook") estimate that there are about 750 B61-7s in the active stockpile, along with about 600 B61-3s,-4s, and-10s.

 

In recent years, some military strategists have advocated deployment and possible use of very small tactical nuclear weapons against Third World adversaries, especially in earth-penetrating roles. Some of this advocacy--perhaps most of it--has come from the weapons labs. In the Fall 1991 issue of Strategic Review, for instance, Los Alamos strategists Thomas Dowler and Joseph Howard wrote:

 

"Would policymakers employ nuclear weapons to protect U.S. contingency forces if conventional weapons proved inadequate, or would the nature of our present nuclear arsenal 'self-deter' policymakers from using those weapons? . . . One possible answer to these questions might be the development of nuclear weapons of very low yields. . . . The existence of such weapons--weapons whose power is effective but not abhorrent--might very well serve to deter a tyrant who believes that American emphasis on proportionality would prevent the employment of the current U.S. arsenal against him.

 

"We doubt that any president would authorize the use of the nuclear weapons in our present arsenal against Third World nations. It is precisely this doubt that leads us to argue for the development of subkiloton weapons."

 

And in July 1992, Los Alamos conducted a high-level briefing called "Potential Uses for Low-Yield Nuclear Weapons in the New World Order." One theme of the briefing was that in future showdowns with Third World states, "we need options besides defeat or use of inappropriately large [nuclear] weapons."

 

One option, suggested the briefing, was to develop and deploy "micronukes" with a yield of some 10 tons of high explosives; "mininukes" with a yield of 100 tons; and "tinynukes" with a yield of 1,000 tons.

 

An earth-penetrator with a yield of just 10 tons could, according to a Los Alamos viewgraph, "hold buried leadership and C3 at risk." And it could do that while keeping "collateral damage very localized."

[GazeboflossUK]

"60 Percent Of Ground Zero Workers Sick" PBS News

 

You Tube

Tuesday, December 12, 2006

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bA57ObvVLc&eurl=

[GazeboflossUK]

Video: Terror drama mocks 9/11 'truthseekers'

 

Raw Story

Tuesday, December 12, 2006

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymfRbx6n0Y8&eurl=

 

Earlier this week, TV cable channel Showtime began the second season of Sleeper Cell: American Terror. The clip, from the show's season opener, begins with mastermind Farik (played by Oded Fuhr) facing torture at the hands of his American interrogators.

 

"Terrorist" characters on the show mock people who don't believe the official government explanation for Sep. 11. The character of a Bosnian terrorist, Ilija Korjenic (played by Henry Lubatti), shares an intimate moment with fellow terrorist, Mina (portrayed by Thelka Reuten). For a few moments, they sarcastically repeat familiar 9/11 conspiracy theories.

 

Show dialog (warning: contains profanity):

 

Female: You know every time we have sex it's like the ultimate 'Fuck you' to Bush, Cheney, and the whole 9/11 plot.

 

I just keep picturing Guiliani and the rest of those assholes supervising the whole thing from that 15 million dollar bunker on the 23rd floor of building 7.

 

You know thats where they broadcast the homing signal from? [To] make sure the planes would hit the towers.

 

Male: I know and the Pentagon was actually hit by a CIA global hawk drone so the administration could start an endless war and turn America into a police state.

 

Female: And what idiot could believe that Osama Bin Laden and his cave dwelling muslim militia managed to outsmart the CIA, the NSA, and the Pentagon - unless Uncle Sam was behind the whole thing.

 

Male: Not me.

[improvisation]

All of you forein dumbfucks should be ashamed. How in hell can anyone think we caused this? In a way yes we did. Only in the sense that BILL CLINTON was handed osama on a silver platter and refused it. Osama dosent work for bush and if you think so you should not be allowed to reproduce. How in hell are we to blame for sycos wanting to kill everone that lives in america for no reason other than they live where they live? Even if you hate someone or dislike what they do that is NO reason to slaughter innocent people. Has everyone frogotten history? More people died in 9/11 than on Pearl Harbor and there wasint so much controversy then. Even then most of the people died there were navy people, on 9/11 it was all regular men and women like you and me. Also all this bullshit about oil is dumb ass hell. If we wanted oil we could have gotten it many other ways alot sooner. Also I dont know if yall are just dumb as rocks but you cant trust all the videos you see or the articles you read. ANYONE can make a site, ANYONE can make a movie. And for that matter even if you dont agree that we should be at war or why we go to war you should keep your dumb mouth shut because the fact is weither you like it or not were at war and in a time of war you should stand behind your country and its leaders. You cant fight a war and fight yourself at the same time. And frankly all you Europeans should shut the hell up because if it wasint for us americans most of you would be dead and the rest would be speaking german.

[GazeboflossUK]

Anyone can just say "no it's not true" over and over again....I guess it's better for you this way, huh? Nice and simple.

Plus, you do know that Pearl Harbor was allowed to happen right? This stuff is even in mainstream news.

 

Just reading through what you posted....

Boy, your a new kind of asshole aren't you?

 

"And frankly all you Europeans should shut the hell up because if it wasint for us americans most of you would be dead and the rest would be speaking german."

 

Jesus, I've never heard that before..:rolleyes:..ha...well done, you just crossed the line into completely useless.

[General Smut]

I like how you always insult people who dont agree with you Gareth!

 

As for going to war, this is supposed to be a democracy and lots of people were against it and they werent listened too. At the time i supported the war, but with hindsight it was the wrong choice. Maybe thats why people cling to theorys like this.

[improvisation]

Your a dumbass how in hell was pearl harbor allowed to happen? What was that president a murderer too? Get a life idiot, and yes my statement is true. We saved your asses and now you most all of you have a stick up your ass about it.

[General Smut]

Pearl Harbour wasnt allowed to happen.

 

And because you yanks took your time in both wars millions of people died.

[alyssa]

^^Hey, improv, before you call someone a dumbass, learn how to spell "psychos" and "whether."

 

:)

[alyssa]

And do make your arguement a bit fair:

 

"Also I dont know if yall are just dumb as rocks but you cant trust all the videos you see or the articles you read. ANYONE can make a site, ANYONE can make a movie."

 

*cough* You can't trust what's on the news either...

[GazeboflossUK]

I like how you always insult people who dont agree with you Gareth!

 

As for going to war, this is supposed to be a democracy and lots of people were against it and they werent listened too. At the time i supported the war, but with hindsight it was the wrong choice. Maybe thats why people cling to theorys like this.

 

What? He just called people like me "dumbfucks" a couple of times and said "you should not be allowed to reproduce".....aswell as just saying this is all 'dumb' and is 'bullshit'...saying it blindly......and I am the one who insults people all the time? I called him an asshole for the pretty sad things he said, so what.

 

Also "cling to Theories like this?"..........what??....You know we have got them pretty much caught, no-matter what you and other people say.

I'm just involved in this because it's so obviously an inside job it's worth spreading the truth.

Nothing get a really fair outing in the mainstream media...every so often they will be someone who allows a little bit too much info to get on the air but other than that there is a media-black out on the big questions....while the media just focus on the same couple of areas's and use the same old "it's crazy, they are all crackpots".....when infact nobody thinks I'm a crackpot...nobody has said it to me in person because they more often know me for fair while before I tell them about 9/11 - they know I'm a good, honest, sensible person so they actually listen.

 

Anyway...as I was saying...it WAS an inside job, but if you choose not to believe it then that's your problem, it's certainly not mine and even when the BBC do their best to white-wash the whole thing in their 9/11 TV Programme next year, the evidence and unanswered question still will remain.

 

ALSO - Pearl Harbor? Are you kidding me? All the top Generals in Washington knew about the planned attack on the harbor.

General George C. Marshall failed to inform the General Walter Short (I think it's his name) in Hawaii about the message they had intercepted from the Japanese on the 4th of December, which is three days before the event on the 7th of December.

This is elementry History.

[General Smut]

But you'd trust some stranger posting theories on the net??

 

Plain common sense and logic defeats this theory hands down.

 

Ask yourself this question: If you wanted to attack a foreign country for its oil - what would you do?

[anniep_93]

I would sneak in one person at a time and be very consipicuous :sneaky:

[General Smut]

 

Also "cling to Theories like this?"..........what??....You know we have got them pretty much caught, no-matter what you and other people say.

 

when infact nobody thinks I'm a crackpot...nobody has said it to me in person because they more often know me for fair while before I tell them about 9/11 - they know I'm a good, honest, sensible person so they actually listen.

 

 

Thats just your opinion thou! You say all that all the time like some bloke starring into the mirror - "I'm confident, i'm confident etc... Half the time to me at least it really does sound like your trying to persuade yourself more then tyring to persade me.

 

And Gareth, I wouldnt say you were a crackpot - i may think your theories are wrong, but you argue them well and your persistent and theories aside you come across as a pretty likeable bloke.

[General Smut]

I would sneak in one person at a time and be very consipicuous :sneaky:

 

So your plan wouldnt involve killing your own citizens on mass, losing public support fighting a dodgy war, spending billions and billions on a losing battle, plunging your country into massive debt and leaving behind plenty of evidence?

[GazeboflossUK]

(I'm not trying to convince myself, haha, and it's not just simply about oil though.)

 

ALSO - Pearl Harbor? Are you kidding me? All the top Generals in Washington knew about the planned attack on the harbor.

General George C. Marshall failed to inform the General Walter Short (I think it's his name) in Hawaii about the message they had intercepted from the Japanese on the 4th of December, which is three days before the event on the 7th of December.

This is elementry History.

 

But somehow this is called a Conspiracy Theory? I don't get it.

 

Well, I do......it's the media/governments way of getting around it, without dealing with it properly.

[General Smut]

You have to look at Pearl Harbour in context.

 

Europe is one big battlefield and the Japs are activley being agressive.

 

With America and Japan being the two top dogs in the area they were going to clash.

Both sides knew this, but America didnt expect a sneak attack. They were waiting for the Japs to declare war first.

 

Btw, Improv America only declared war on Japan, they never declared war on Nazi germany - it was the germans who declared war on the US.

[Matter-Eater Lad]

Pearl Harbour wasnt allowed to happen.

 

And because you yanks took your time in both wars millions of people died.

 

Because America well part of it didnt want to get involved in wars far away and because appeasment always works:rolleyes: Some still think isolation will work. And yes i will admit America's stupidity ALONG with europes even greater stupidity at the time did cost tens of millions of lives. Europe dropped the ball and america didnt pick it up til it was almost too late.

 

Gee some American to day still havent learned the lessons of ww2. And here;s where Cammy yells "shut up about ww2" because like all the ignorant morons in the world they'd rather ignore history then learn from it. Its one of the many things idiots have in common, the inability to learn from history.

 

As far as this 911 train issue...Gareth is just mad because what i posted is more believable then his shit.