Jump to content

Coincidence?


Eric Carmen

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 142
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Shelley--it would be very boring if everyone agreed on everything. I'm really hard to offend or "ruffle" and I'm interested in the opinions posted here. I just try to keep in mind that someone else may be offended.

I've secretly hoped this topic would come up because I didn't know how to start it myself! laugh

And now it looks like I have another video to watch!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This will be my last post on this subject.

It's a scene from the movie "Network," released in 1976. The film won four Academy Awards, including Best Screenplay, for writer Paddy Chayevsky. I find it especially haunting in light of current developments. Keep in mind, this was written 33 years ago.

http://www.vtap.com/video/Network+-+Arthur+Jensen%2527s+speech/CL0156983424_322cd9cde_T0MzNDY5Nn5pbjoxMg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Faye Dunaway was on a roll back then. "Chinatown" should have given Nicholson an oscar before "One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest". And, if this is the final post on this subject, don't you have to close it with:

"I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore!"

The end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This will be my last post on this subject.

"It's a scene from the movie "Network," released in 1976. The film won four Academy Awards, including Best Screenplay, for writer Paddy Chayevsky. I find it especially haunting in light of current developments. Keep in mind, this was written 33 years ago." Quote from Eric

http://www.vtap.com/video/Network+-+Arthur+Jensen%2527s+speech/CL0156983424_322cd9cde_T0MzNDY5Nn5pbjoxMg

I don't know how I missed this post earlier, but I did. My husband refers to "Network" and this scene all the time...

Great minds must think alike!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, Larry, it was starting to really depress me. The more I read, the worse it kept getting. The third to the last video I put up was one I hadn't seen before, and it pretty much summed everything up. You can clearly see the explosions going off as the building is falling, bringing it down in a controlled demolition.

And then there's the testimony of Norman Mineta before the 911 commission. His testimony regarding Cheney's response to the young man in the PEOC bunker telling him "the plane is ten miles out" and asking "Do the orders still stand?" is the smoking gun, as far as I'm concerned. The only "order" that they could have possibly been talking about was an order NOT TO SHOOT DOWN THE PLANE HEADING FOR THE PENTAGON. Otherwise the entire conversation makes no sense at all. Standard protocol would have had NORAD all over that plane long before it strayed into the airspace over the Pentagon and the White House, and yet, somehow, it was allowed to get through, 34 minutes after the entire world knew we were under attack.

.There is simply no explanation for how this could have happened. You would think the guy in charge that day (General Richard Myers) would have been brought up on charges after his failure to prevent the Pentagon disaster. Instead, he was promoted.

Interestingly, the "official" 911 commission report has now apparently eliminated Mineta's very damaging testimony and altered the timeline regarding Cheney's arrival at the PEOC bunker, contradicting Mineta's testimony AND Cheney's own words on "Meet The Press." Mineta's timeline coincides precisely with the FAA and the position of the plane. Nice work, guys.

When the Warren Commission released it's bogus work of fiction, Allen Dulles remarked that the American people "don't read."

Clearly, the Bush White House has confidence that is still the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remind me again for the reason WHY Bush and Co would kill 3000 of their own people and plunge their country's economy billions downward, and put a permanent negative start on the Bush presidency?...

There are plenty of other explanations for those "puffs of smoke" a few floors below the collapse...Why are we so sure they are bombs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK Tony, since you asked.....

In 1997, a "think tank" was formed called "Project For A New American Century" or PNAC. In 2000,they wrote a "white paper" outlining the need to radically increase the defense budget, re-tool our military and take the war to the enemy on multiple fronts, but they didn't believe the American people would ever approve such proposals, absent a "new Pearl Harbor-like event." After all, the Cold War was over. We didn't have to worry about the Soviet Union anymore. Why should we spent hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on "Star Wars" missile defense systems, new fighter jets and bunker buster bombs?

911 was the catalyst for the replacement of the Cold War with the brand, new "War On Terror." America had been attacked, just like....well.... Pearl Harbor! Bush could now justify that huge increase in defense spending. The "War On Terror" was a war that was open-ended, like the "War On Drugs." It could take decades, a war without end.

And who were the direct recipients of all that new spending? The same defense companies that sponsored PNAC in the first place.

Who were the members of the PNAC think tank who wrote that "white paper"?

The paper was signed by Dick Cheney, Condi Rice, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Pearl, William Kristol, Jeb Bush, Elliot Abrams and Donald Rumsfeld, among others. All the people who ended up filling the cabinet and top advisory positions in the Bush administration.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SP5ugDidS_Q

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, Tony.

I'm really not a conspiracy nut. I've just always asked questions when something didn't quite feel right to me.

Initially, I bought the 911 story, just like everyone else, but I read a lot and, somewhere along the line, I began to wonder about a few things. That led to more reading, and, slowly, the whole picture began to change.

At this point,the 911 Commission is starting to smell a lot like the Warren Commission.

The "rationale" used by LBJ and Earl Warren for selling America the story that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone, was that they were afraid that if a conspiracy was found that led back to Castro or the KGB, the American people would be so outraged that they might demand retaliation that could start World War III.

Here's the only question anyone really needs to ask:

How is it possible that a big, clumsy Boeing passenger jet, with an amateur pilot at the controls, managed to breach the most protected airspace in the world, monitored by the most sophisticated military defense system ever built, execute an incredible 240 degree turn at the last minute, and slam into the Pentagon, unimpeded, 34 minutes after everyone on the planet knew we were under attack? This same system is so sensitive it can detect a missile launched from the Soviet Union within seconds, and signal Norad with all the pertinent information to launch a counter strike. And yet, on 911, a passenger jet got through.

Does that make any sense to you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, when has a Gub-ment agency ever got it right before? You are assuming our DOD is any more competent and/or efficient than other Gub-ment agencies? All the report shows is a bunch of confusion, indecision and mistakes dealing with an off-course hi-jacked passenger jetliner. That sounds like the Federal Gub-ment "in action" or "inaction" to me...Or does it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...