[political-research] Re: brzezinski and false flag terror
What do you mean here, Vig? [see below: Relevance?] One definitely can argue that Zbig has the advantage of being outside the power circles that acted on / or had to act in the post 9/11 environment. As one could definitely confront him with his own earlier decisions, BUT whatever despot Saddam was, Iraq was secular and not "islamofascist". This should not be allowed to slip down the memory hole. This is a very central issue. And it is at the center of interest for many people, understandably. Now what could make you want to attack Brzezinski now, he is among the few that has apparently been a consistent critic of the WWIII/IV neocon strategy? And that is the reason why people are listening to Zbig now. I can't believe this mad act is a neocon directed op, but I ask myself what feeds the heightened emotionality of this guy, his anger his madness his prejudice and stupidity. And the only thing that comes to mind in this context is the constant fear rap and ideas from right wing circles. What is this guy's intent? What makes him so sure that Zbig is the ultimate evil NOW? The only motive I can see is he does not want people to listen to him, why??? Is he supporting the government, the war on terror? Don't you agree it was a badly planned and stupid act? --- In political-research@yahoogroups.com, "Vigilius Haufniensis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Now, given all of this, why would someone like Luke Rudkowski, displaying the same bias and agenda as Michael Ruppert and Greg Palast, go after Brzezinski while failing to mention a word about the neocons? There are only two possible explanations: Rudkowski is either an ignorant jackass, as he appears to be, or he is a witting neocon op, which I wouldn't rule out. > > > VMANN: relevance? > > >
[political-research] Re: Best Knowledge and Guesses about 9/11 to Date
On Sean's List of evidence: 11. Pro-Israel militants and neocon sympathizers have been the most conspicuous and frenetic apologists for the 9/11 official story. That's true, and something easy to check, but does that make them insiders concerning the 9/11 plot automatically? What keeps coming to mind concerning the neocons as pulling 9/11 strings, wouldn't we have witnessed a much more smooth execution of the WWW III/IV enterprise? Isn't the fact that "the whole world" suspected, knew and watched the manipulations - that's what makes Zbig a favorite of us now, since in this context he is one of us - the best evidence that the neocons were caught by surprise but didn't want to let the chance slip to execute what they had planned all along??
[political-research] Fwd: [SPY NEWS] Officers: Ex-CIA chief Tenet a 'failed' leader
Begin forwarded message: From: "Mario Profaca" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: April 29, 2007 6:41:11 PM PDT To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [SPY NEWS] Officers: Ex-CIA chief Tenet a 'failed' leader Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/29/tenet.letter/index.html Officers: Ex-CIA chief Tenet a 'failed' leader POSTED: 6:14 p.m. EDT, April 29, 2007 (CNN) -- In a letter written Saturday to former CIA Director George Tenet, six former CIA officers described their former boss as "the Alberto Gonzales of the intelligence community," and called his book "an admission of failed leadership." The writers said Tenet has "a moral obligation" to return the Medal of Freedom he received from President Bush. They also called on him to give more than half the royalties he gets from book, "At the Center of the Storm," to U.S. soldiers wounded in Iraq and families of the dead. (Watch Sec. of State Condoleezza Rice talk about Tenet's book) The letter, signed by Phil Giraldi, Ray McGovern, Larry Johnson, Jim Marcinkowski, Vince Cannistraro and David MacMichael, said Tenet should have resigned in protest rather than take part in the administration's buildup to the war. (Read the full letter) Johnson is a former CIA intelligence official and registered Republican who voted for Bush in 2000. McGovern is a former CIA analyst. Cannistraro is former head of the CIA's counterterrorism division and was head of intelligence for the National Security Council in the late 1980s. The writers said they agree that Bush administration officials took the nation to war "for flimsy reasons," and that it has proved "ill-advised and wrong-headed." But, they added, "your lament that you are a victim in a process you helped direct is self-serving, misleading and, as head of the intelligence community, an admission of failed leadership. "You were not a victim. You were a willing participant in a poorly considered policy to start an unnecessary war and you share culpability with Dick Cheney and George Bush for the debacle in Iraq." Tenet's 'lack of courage' The writers accused Tenet of having helped send "very mixed signals" to Americans and their legislators prior to the war. "CIA field operatives produced solid intelligence in September 2002 that stated clearly there was no stockpile of any kind of WMD in Iraq. "This intelligence was ignored and later misused." The letter said CIA officers learned later that month Iraq had no contact with Osama bin Laden and that then-President Saddam Hussein considered the al Qaeda leader to be an enemy. Still, Tenet "went before Congress in February 2003 and testified that Iraq did indeed have links to al Qaeda. "You showed a lack of leadership and courage in January of 2003 as the Bush administration pushed and cajoled analysts and managers to let them make the bogus claim that Iraq was on the verge of getting its hands on uranium. "You signed off on Colin Powell's presentation to the United Nations. And, at his insistence, you sat behind him and visibly squandered CIA's most precious asset - credibility." The letter described Tenet as "one of the bullies." "You helped set the bar very low for reporting that supported favored White House positions, while raising the bar astronomically high when it came to raw intelligence that did not support the case for war being hawked by the president and vice president. "It now turns out that you were the Alberto Gonzales of the intelligence community -- a grotesque mixture of incompetence and sycophancy shielded by a genial personality." The letter said Tenet's failure to resist pressures from Cheney and then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld helped build public support for a war that has cost more than 3,000 American lives and many times that among Iraqis. "You betrayed the CIA officers who collected the intelligence that made it clear that Saddam did not pose an imminent threat. You betrayed the analysts who tried to withstand the pressure applied by Cheney and Rumsfeld. "Most importantly and tragically, you failed to meet your obligations to the people of the United States." Tenet's memoir, to be published Monday, covers his tenure as director from July 1997 to July 2004. In an interview to air Sunday on CBS News' "60 Minutes," Tenet expressed outrage that senior officials including Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice have used his "slam dunk" reference in discussing Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq over its weapons of mass destruction, which turned out not to exist. (Read full story) "They never let it go. I mean, I became campaign talk. I was a talking point. 'Look at the idiot who told us and we decided to go to war.' Well, let's not be so disingenuous ... Let's everybody just get up and tell the truth. Tell the American people what really happened." -__ ___ _ ___ __ ___ _ _ _ __ /-_|-0-\-V-/-\|-|-__|-|-|-/-_| \_-\--_/\-/|-\\-|-_||-V-V-\_-\ |__/_|--//-|_|\_|___|\_A_/|__/ SPY NEWS
Re: [political-research] Re: Best Knowledge and Guesses about 9/11 to Date
Let me expand a bit on this. *If* 9/11 was an inside job, the number of conspirators would have been kept to an absolute minimum -- perhaps no more than 100 -- perhaps even fewer. (And I keep using the word *if*, even though I am quite certain that 9/11 required collusion from some members of the military-industrial complex, because we don't have absolute and decisive evidence that this is so. Overwhelming circumstantial evidence does not constitute absolute proof.) Most of the pro-Israel militants who have been ringleading the campaign to obstruct a thorough and honest investigation into 9/11 were certainly not conspirators in the commission of 9/11. What is happening, I think, is that they strongly *suspect* that the neocons and some elements of the Israeli government may have been involved in 9/11, and that the operation went very badly and is on the verge of being exposed. They are witting participants in the cover-up of 9/11, but not necessarily in the planning and execution of 9/11. Think about it: if you were a pro-Israel militant, and if you truly believed the 9/11 official story, wouldn't you be pushing hard to get all the facts about 9/11 out in the open and to put to rest all the conspiracy suspicions? I know I would. Obviously they don't believe the official story themselves, and they are worried that some neocons and Israelis may have been involved in a 9/11 false flag op, in the tradition of the Lavon Affair and the USS Liberty attack. They are closing ranks and constructing a bodyguard of lies around the op. What I still can't wrap my mind around is this: how could anyone, no matter how fanatical and mentally challenged, ever believe that one could conduct an operation like 9/11 without being caught, with the eyes of the entire world on every minute detail of what occurred? But then I think about the Lavon Affair, the USS Liberty attack, Iran-Contra and the Iraq War, and I go, oh yeah There really are people in the world with judgment that impaired. It could happen. The psychology of messianism can propel one into committing spectacularly self-destructive acts, and these folks wrote the book on messianism. LeaNder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Sean's List of evidence: 11. Pro-Israel militants and neocon sympathizers have been the most conspicuous and frenetic apologists for the 9/11 official story. That's true, and something easy to check, but does that make them insiders concerning the 9/11 plot automatically? What keeps coming to mind concerning the neocons as pulling 9/11 strings, wouldn't we have witnessed a much more smooth execution of the WWW III/IV enterprise? Isn't the fact that "the whole world" suspected, knew and watched the manipulations - that's what makes Zbig a favorite of us now, since in this context he is one of us - the best evidence that the neocons were caught by surprise but didn't want to let the chance slip to execute what they had planned all along??
Re: [political-research] Fwd: [SPY NEWS] Officers: Ex-CIA chief Tenet a 'failed' leader
Poor George Tenet -- he is going to get battered from every conceivable direction -- from both the neocons and the opponents of the neocons -- and justifiably so. This is the price one pays if one doesn't have the balls to stand up on one's two feet and to try to tell the truth. The only way Tenet can redeem himself now is to discover some real courage inside himself and to start telling the truth -- *all* the truth. Ditto for Colin Powell. They can't get by muttering a few truths out of the corners of their mouths -- they have to enunciate the truth clearly and directly and relentlessly. If they do, they will discover that they have many powerful supporters throughout the government and around the world. If they continue to try to protect junior out of loyalty to the old man, they will remain mired down in a catastrophic mess. They can't blame the neocons for their own weakness of character. RoadsEnd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Begin forwarded message: From: "Mario Profaca" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: April 29, 2007 6:41:11 PM PDT To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [SPY NEWS] Officers: Ex-CIA chief Tenet a 'failed' leader Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/29/tenet.letter/index.html Officers: Ex-CIA chief Tenet a 'failed' leader POSTED: 6:14 p.m. EDT, April 29, 2007 (CNN) -- In a letter written Saturday to former CIA Director George Tenet, six former CIA officers described their former boss as "the Alberto Gonzales of the intelligence community," and called his book "an admission of failed leadership." The writers said Tenet has "a moral obligation" to return the Medal of Freedom he received from President Bush. They also called on him to give more than half the royalties he gets from book, "At the Center of the Storm," to U.S. soldiers wounded in Iraq and families of the dead. (Watch Sec. of State Condoleezza Rice talk about Tenet's book) The letter, signed by Phil Giraldi, Ray McGovern, Larry Johnson, Jim Marcinkowski, Vince Cannistraro and David MacMichael, said Tenet should have resigned in protest rather than take part in the administration's buildup to the war. (Read the full letter) Johnson is a former CIA intelligence official and registered Republican who voted for Bush in 2000. McGovern is a former CIA analyst. Cannistraro is former head of the CIA's counterterrorism division and was head of intelligence for the National Security Council in the late 1980s. The writers said they agree that Bush administration officials took the nation to war "for flimsy reasons," and that it has proved "ill-advised and wrong-headed." But, they added, "your lament that you are a victim in a process you helped direct is self-serving, misleading and, as head of the intelligence community, an admission of failed leadership. "You were not a victim. You were a willing participant in a poorly considered policy to start an unnecessary war and you share culpability with Dick Cheney and George Bush for the debacle in Iraq." Tenet's 'lack of courage' The writers accused Tenet of having helped send "very mixed signals" to Americans and their legislators prior to the war. "CIA field operatives produced solid intelligence in September 2002 that stated clearly there was no stockpile of any kind of WMD in Iraq. "This intelligence was ignored and later misused." The letter said CIA officers learned later that month Iraq had no contact with Osama bin Laden and that then-President Saddam Hussein considered the al Qaeda leader to be an enemy. Still, Tenet "went before Congress in February 2003 and testified that Iraq did indeed have links to al Qaeda. "You showed a lack of leadership and courage in January of 2003 as the Bush administration pushed and cajoled analysts and managers to let them make the bogus claim that Iraq was on the verge of getting its hands on uranium. "You signed off on Colin Powell's presentation to the United Nations. And, at his insistence, you sat behind him and visibly squandered CIA's most precious asset - credibility." The letter described Tenet as "one of the bullies." "You helped set the bar very low for reporting that supported favored White House positions, while raising the bar astronomically high when it came to raw intelligence that did not support the case for war being hawked by the president and vice president. "It now turns out that you were the Alberto Gonzales of the intelligence community -- a grotesque mixture of incompetence and sycophancy shielded by a genial personality." The letter said Tenet's failure to resist pressures from Cheney and then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld helped build public support for a war that has cost more than 3,000 American lives and many times that among Iraqis. "You betrayed the CIA of
[political-research] Bush Has Destroyed Iraq & America-by Paul Craig Roberts
Bush Has Destroyed Iraq and America
byPaul Craig Roberts
by Paul Craig Roberts
window.onerror=function(){clickURL=document.location.href;return true;}
if(!self.clickURL) clickURL=parent.location.href;
DIGG THIS
http://www.lewrockwell.com/roberts/roberts207.html
Every Americanwho voted Republican shares
responsibility for the great evil Americahas brought to the
Middle East.
The evil thatAmerica brought to Iraq transcends
the tens or hundreds of thousandsof Iraqi civilians who have
been killed and maimed in the conflict.The evil goes beyond the
destruction of ancient historical artifactsand the civilian
infrastructure of a secular state and the decimationof the
lives, careers, and families of millions of Iraqis.
The violenceand killing that Bush brought to Iraq
has spread antagonism betweenSunni and Shiite throughout the
Middle East with potentially draconianconsequences. Bushs war
has turned Muslim hearts and minds againstAmerica and made
terrorism an acceptable means to resist Americanhegemony. With
his mindless war, Bush has created more terrorismthan the world
has ever seen.
The reasonsgiven for the American invasion of Iraq
have been exposed as lies,revealing America as either a country
of fools and idiots or ofwar criminals. Worldwide polls show
that America is no longer regardedas a guiding light but is
tied with Israel as the second greatestthreat to world
stability.
The nuclear-armedRussians, alarmed by Americas
gratuitous aggression and interferencein Russian and Middle
Eastern internal affairs and by Bushs aggressivewithdrawal on
June 13, 2002 from the 1972 anti-ballistic missiletreaty, no
longer see the US as a partner in peace but as a dangerous
militaristic aggressor. The chance for understanding and trust with
Russia has been destroyed by the stupid Bush administration. The
White House Moron, who cannot successfully occupy Baghdad, believes
he can run over Russia.
Former CIAdirector George "Slam-Dunk" Tenet writes
in a new book,Atthe Center of the Storm: My
years at the CIA that Vice PresidentDick Cheney and the
neoconservatives caused America to invade Iraqwithout ever
holding a serious debate about whether Iraq was a threat.Tenet
writes: "There was never a serious debate that I knowof within
the administration about the imminence of the Iraqi threat."
The 2003 Americaninvasion of Iraq is a war crime
under international law. The invasioncaused sectarian violence
far beyond anything Iraq had ever experiencedunder Saddam
Hussein. Tenet writes that "sectarian violencein Iraq has taken
on a life of its own and that US forces are becomingmore and
more irrelevant to the management of that violence."
Tenet saysthat Dick Cheney made him a scapegoat
for the disastrous war bymisrepresenting to media what he meant
by "slam-dunk."Interviewed by "60 Minutes," Tenet said that the
administrationmisrepresented his comment to mean that the case
was air tight thatSaddam Hussein had weapons of mass
destruction. Tenet states thatthe Bush administrations
misrepresentation of what he said is "themost despicable thing
that ever happened" to him.
The Americanpeople have never been told the real
reasons that Bush-Cheney andthe Republican Party rushed us to
war in Iraq. Americans have onlybeen fed a pack of transparent
lies.
The war hasbrought no honor, no glory, and no
tangible benefit. The war hasbrought shame upon America for
routine torture of Iraqi detaineesand for the routine slaughter
of unarmed Iraqi civilians mothers,fathers, children,
grandparents by trigger-happy American troops.There are even
reports of US mercenaries having fun riding aroundtaking pot
shots at Iraqi civilians.
Click to join catapultthepropaganda
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/catapultthepropaganda/join
Click to join openmindop
[political-research] Virginia governor closes gun loophole
Virginia governor closes gun loophole By BOB LEWIS, Associated Press Writer 7 minutes ago The governor on Monday closed the loophole in state law that allowed the Virginia Tech gunman to pass a federal background check and buy the weapons used in the massacre. Gov. Timothy M. Kaine issued an executive order requiring that a database of people banned from buying guns include anyone who is found to be dangerous and ordered to undergo involuntary mental health treatment. Seung-Hui Cho had been ordered to undergo psychiatric counseling after a judge ruled that he was a danger to himself. But because Cho was treated as an outpatient and never committed to a mental health hospital, the court's decision was not entered into the database that gun dealers must check before selling a weapon. The database "should include any determination that someone is mentally ill and so dangerous to himself or others as to warrant involuntary treatment," Kaine said in a statement. Cho, a 23-year-old Virginia Tech senior described as a troubled loner, bought his guns legally through gun shops. He gunned down 32 people in a residence hall and a classroom building before killing himself. No motive has been established for his rampage. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070430/ap_on_re_us/virginia_tech&printer =1;_ylt=AmPStbhIXeJsbPlB5FSdCR5H2ocA
[political-research] Re: Best Knowledge and Guesses about 9/11 to Date
If I were a "Pro-Israel militant" already the term you use to categorize me would trigger a standard chain of associations. No one but ..., would use this term, it probably would feel. >> Think about it: if you were a pro-Israel militant, and if youtruly believed the 9/11 official story, wouldn't you be pushing hard toget all the facts about 9/11 out in the open and to put to rest all theconspiracy suspicions?< No, since to me "believing the official story" would only mean I accept that 20 Islamic perpetrators committed 9/11. And the government can't tell us everything, since if it did, all the bad islamofacist out there would know it too, and could then act accordingly. We must respect that the government can't tell us all it knows, so it can prevent the bad Muslims from attacking us again. capice? --- In political-research@yahoogroups.com, Sean McBride <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Let me expand a bit on this. > > *If* 9/11 was an inside job, the number of conspirators would have been kept to an absolute minimum -- perhaps no more than 100 -- perhaps even fewer. (And I keep using the word *if*, even though I am quite certain that 9/11 required collusion from some members of the military-industrial complex, because we don't have absolute and decisive evidence that this is so. Overwhelming circumstantial evidence does not constitute absolute proof.) Most of the pro-Israel militants who have been ringleading the campaign to obstruct a thorough and honest investigation into 9/11 were certainly not conspirators in the commission of 9/11. What is happening, I think, is that they strongly *suspect* that the neocons and some elements of the Israeli government may have been involved in 9/11, and that the operation went very badly and is on the verge of being exposed. They are witting participants in the cover-up of 9/11, but not necessarily in the planning and execution of 9/11. > > Think about it: if you were a pro-Israel militant, and if you truly believed the 9/11 official story, wouldn't you be pushing hard to get all the facts about 9/11 out in the open and to put to rest all the conspiracy suspicions? I know I would. Obviously they don't believe the official story themselves, and they are worried that some neocons and Israelis may have been involved in a 9/11 false flag op, in the tradition of the Lavon Affair and the USS Liberty attack. They are closing ranks and constructing a bodyguard of lies around the op. > > What I still can't wrap my mind around is this: how could anyone, no matter how fanatical and mentally challenged, ever believe that one could conduct an operation like 9/11 without being caught, with the eyes of the entire world on every minute detail of what occurred? But then I think about the Lavon Affair, the USS Liberty attack, Iran-Contra and the Iraq War, and I go, oh yeah There really are people in the world with judgment that impaired. It could happen. The psychology of messianism can propel one into committing spectacularly self-destructive acts, and these folks wrote the book on messianism. > > > LeaNder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sean's List of evidence: 11. Pro-Israel militants and neocon sympathizers have been the most conspicuous and frenetic apologists for the 9/11 official story. > > That's true, and something easy to check, but does that make them insiders concerning the 9/11 plot automatically? > > What keeps coming to mind concerning the neocons as pulling 9/11 strings, wouldn't we have witnessed a much more smooth execution of the WWW III/IV enterprise? > > Isn't the fact that "the whole world" suspected, knew and watched the manipulations - that's what makes Zbig a favorite of us now, since in this context he is one of us - the best evidence that the neocons were caught by surprise but didn't want to let the chance slip to execute what they had planned all along?? >
[political-research] Re: Best Knowledge and Guesses about 9/11 to Date
Used the wrong button again I wanted to add this: Admittedly the term pro-Israel militants perfectly fits lady Atlas Shrugs the shrieking harpy from hell (as you call her) and the larger pro-war-anti-camel driver-attack-crowd. Eventually they made me change my mind. With a little help by our friend Wolcott. Admittedly I had to adapt my mental navigation systems to this new phenomenon. I have the impression a couple of people besides me seem to be fighting confusion in this context. I can see that with your main suspects thesis many pieces of the puzzle seem to fall into place, as far back as the urgent need to win the election, to be in the right place at such an important time. A time so important not much attention could be paid to the annoying democratic routines. if But concerning Tenet: He sat behind Powell at the UN, but the paper Powell presented came from Britain and wasn't prepared by the CIA, Have you thought about that? Maybe the process did not work as smoothly as hoped since there were more minor obstructive practices going on than we are aware of. And if there hadn't been we would have wondered much less: What the hell is going on? I am have to get my ass down to work otherwise I will get into deep trouble, so I'll return to lurking mode for a while again. But I would be interested in a short comment about: Michael Savage. --- In political-research@yahoogroups.com, "LeaNder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If I were a "Pro-Israel militant" already the term you use to > categorize me would trigger a standard chain of associations. No one > but ..., would use this term, it probably would feel. > > >> Think about it: if you were a pro-Israel militant, and if youtruly > believed the 9/11 official story, wouldn't you be pushing hard toget all > the facts about 9/11 out in the open and to put to rest all > theconspiracy suspicions?< > > No, since to me "believing the official story" would only mean I > accept that 20 Islamic perpetrators committed 9/11. And the government > can't tell us everything, since if it did, all the bad islamofacist out > there would know it too, and could then act accordingly. We must respect > that the government can't tell us all it knows, so it can prevent the > bad Muslims from attacking us again. > > capice? > > > > > > --- In political-research@yahoogroups.com, Sean McBride smcbride2@ > wrote: > > > > Let me expand a bit on this. > > > > *If* 9/11 was an inside job, the number of conspirators would have > been kept to an absolute minimum -- perhaps no more than 100 -- perhaps > even fewer. (And I keep using the word *if*, even though I am quite > certain that 9/11 required collusion from some members of the > military-industrial complex, because we don't have absolute and decisive > evidence that this is so. Overwhelming circumstantial evidence does not > constitute absolute proof.) Most of the pro-Israel militants who have > been ringleading the campaign to obstruct a thorough and honest > investigation into 9/11 were certainly not conspirators in the > commission of 9/11. What is happening, I think, is that they strongly > *suspect* that the neocons and some elements of the Israeli government > may have been involved in 9/11, and that the operation went very badly > and is on the verge of being exposed. They are witting participants in > the cover-up of 9/11, but not necessarily in the planning and execution > of 9/11. > > > > Think about it: if you were a pro-Israel militant, and if you truly > believed the 9/11 official story, wouldn't you be pushing hard to get > all the facts about 9/11 out in the open and to put to rest all the > conspiracy suspicions? I know I would. Obviously they don't believe > the official story themselves, and they are worried that some neocons > and Israelis may have been involved in a 9/11 false flag op, in the > tradition of the Lavon Affair and the USS Liberty attack. They are > closing ranks and constructing a bodyguard of lies around the op. > > > > What I still can't wrap my mind around is this: how could anyone, no > matter how fanatical and mentally challenged, ever believe that one > could conduct an operation like 9/11 without being caught, with the eyes > of the entire world on every minute detail of what occurred? But then I > think about the Lavon Affair, the USS Liberty attack, Iran-Contra and > the Iraq War, and I go, oh yeah There really are people in the > world with judgment that impaired. It could happen. The psychology of > messianism can propel one into committing spectacularly self-destructive > acts, and these folks wrote the book on messianism. > > > > > > LeaNder l.l.hahn@ wrote: On Sean's List of evidence: 11. > Pro-Israel militants and neocon sympathizers have been the most > conspicuous and frenetic apologists for the 9/11 official story. > > > > That's true, and something easy to check, but does that make them > insiders concerning the 9/11 plot autom
Re: [political-research] Re: brzezinski and false flag terror
> What do you mean here, Vig? [see below: Relevance?] One definitely can > argue that Zbig has the advantage of being outside the power circles > that acted on / or had to act in the post 9/11 environment. VMANN: so? whether or not luke is secretly evil has no relevence to the matter at hand. neither does zbig's access to the POST 911 power circles, i would suggest. As one could> definitely confront him with his own earlier decisions, BUT whatever> despot Saddam was, Iraq was secular and not "islamofascist". This should> not be allowed to slip down the memory hole. This is a very central > issue. And it is at the center of interest for many people,> > understandably. > > Now what could make you want to attack Brzezinski now, he is among the > few that has apparently been a consistent critic of the WWIII/IV > neocon strategy? And that is the reason why people are listening to Zbig > now. VMANN: well, luke and the boys also confronted willian kristol, iirc. zbig just happened to be speaking at the local YMCA. > I can't believe this mad act is a neocon directed op, but I ask myself > what feeds the heightened emotionality of this guy, his anger his > madness his prejudice and stupidity. And the only thing that comes to > mind in this context is the constant fear rap and ideas from right wing > circles. VMANN: what evidence is there of heightened emotionality, prejudice and/or stupidity? also, give relevance. > What is this guy's intent? What makes him so sure that Zbig is the > ultimate evil NOW? The only motive I can see is he does not want people > to listen to him, why??? Is he supporting the government, the war on > terror? > Don't you agree it was a badly planned and stupid act? VMANN: well, to be honest, seeing these young kids doing this stuff warms my heart. i was in a similar position with the feminazis, back in the day. vigilius haufniensis
