BS: RosieO'Donnell&WillieNelson on 9/11

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: balladeer
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 03:52 PM

That should read JON Stewart. Sorry, Jon.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: GUEST,Seiri Omaar
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 04:19 PM

Froth, the media is controlled by corporations, not the govt. Follow the money.
Please do some research.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 06:46 PM

Frothy, Rosie O'Donnell may be a cornerstone of your society, and if so, heaven pity you. But not of mine. Or the rest of the country in general. Or the world. The Cosmos is a bit larger than the screen of a 13" television set.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Peace
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 06:50 PM

Happy Birthday, Rosie.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: GUEST,Froth
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 08:37 PM

No, American society is essentially what you see on TV. Try to strike up a conversation about something BESIDES Rosie vs. Donald around the water cooler, and people don't know what to say. TV is the great uniter in America. It tells us what to think, what to buy, and how to behave.

And corporations ARE the govt, Seiri Omaar. Television serves govt/corporate interests. military-industrial, govt-corporate...we were warned. Can you tell me who warned us about that? Can you provide the complete quote? If not, do some research.

So do you like my homage to you in my choice of names, Firth? Ridicule is the sincerest form of flatulence, you know.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Peace
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 08:40 PM

"This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together."

1960

Dwight D Eisenhower

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 08:46 PM

It's enough to make you weep.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Donuel
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 09:00 PM

I often say tht WW II has never ended for the USA.
The compartmentalized covert and overt military budgets, projects and adventures are the same. Only targets have changed.

To have a war economy decade after decade that rivals and exceeds our spending during WWII has the taste of death in every bite.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Peace
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 09:05 PM

BTW, that is not the complete speech from DDE. That can be read here.


NB The speech was written in 1960 but delivered in 1961. (My mistake above.)

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: catspaw49
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 09:20 PM

.......and the speech coined the name "Military Industrial Complex." We've even run threads about that here at Mudcat Frothballs. Now take your sanctimonius ass and your dipshit, factless, opinions, and put 'em where the sun don't shine.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: balladeer
Date: 22 Mar 07 - 01:29 AM

So I take it Froth, 'Spaw, and Little Hawk are old friends who enjoy
kicking the s**t out of each other in this forum. And I'm guessing the topic is less important than the exchange of ripostes. Is that right?

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: GUEST,Froth
Date: 22 Mar 07 - 02:20 PM

Yes, the Eisenhower quote is indeed depressing. The old fart was dying and finally spoke some truth, when he had nothing to lose. I forget...was he still alive in '63 when Kennedy got his head blown off for upholding principles? I bet at that moment he realized the world would remember him (Eisenhower) as a coward. After D-Day and all that, he didn't have the guts to stand up to the CIA. He should have disbanded the organization, the way Kennedy planned to do. Eisenhower should have risked the assassination. He might have got away with it, because of his stature and reputation. Instead, he just "warned" us. He talked a good political lesson, but he left behind a lousy one.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Ebbie
Date: 22 Mar 07 - 02:52 PM

What makes you say that Eisenhower "was dying" when he wrote that? He lived until 1969.

For the record, I may be incredibly and terminally naive but the bloviating that one or more of posters persist in espouses views I don't see.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: bobad
Date: 22 Mar 07 - 02:55 PM

"bloviating" - perfect!

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Don Firth
Date: 22 Mar 07 - 02:59 PM

Very peculiar view of history there, Frothy. Also very peculiar water cooler you drink from if television determines the nature of your reality.

Sorry I didn't recognize you marvelous tribute to me in your choice of pseudonym. Firth is a time-honored Scottish place name (meaning "inlet" or "tributary," as in the Firth of Forth, or the strait between the Scottish mainland and the Orkneys, the Pentland Firth--my great-grandfather came from Orkney). Nothing particularly "frothy" about it.

Anyway, if I were you, I'd find another water cooler. As they say, "Maybe there's something in the water. . . ."

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Mar 07 - 03:27 PM

Your supposition, balladeer, is correct insofar as concerns myself and Spaw. Yes, we enjoy the ripostes the kidding around. Froth is a somewhat different case, and is dead serious, I can assure you.

I try to maintain a sense of humor even in political discussions, and I try to remember not to hate people just because they disagree with me on some political question. It doesn't help matters any when one does that.

I tend to agree with much of what Froth is saying, but I can't say for sure how much of it is correct. I think some of it is.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Peace
Date: 22 Mar 07 - 03:29 PM

I have no sense of humour. Too much bloviating in my younger days I guess. (I hope that's a good thing.)

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Peace
Date: 22 Mar 07 - 03:31 PM

Also, I tend to go with the philosophy of "F#ck 'em if they can't take a joke."

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Mar 07 - 03:47 PM

Yeah... LOL! Mick Jagger said that about various bad reactions people had to certain lines in the song "Some Girls".

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: balladeer
Date: 22 Mar 07 - 08:14 PM

Thanks for clearing that up, Little Hawk. The banter you lads have been swapping has brought my old pal, Rick Fielding, sharply into my mind. (He's never very far away.) I can't help thinking he'd be in the thick, wielding his sharply honed verbal axe (pun intended) and trading blows with the rest of you.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: GUEST,Froth
Date: 22 Mar 07 - 08:34 PM

O'Donnell's action is important because of the following. Fascist radio host Glenn Beck said this:

BECK: I can't take it that Rosie O'Donnell can be put on ABC television, mainstream, unquestioned, by the mainstream media. She can say whatever she wants to say, she can take the sides with, what's his name, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, a guy who was the mastermind behind 9-11...

http://mediamatters.org/items/200703220010

In that rant Beck told you that Khalid was the mastermind behind 9/11. What happened to bin Laden? This is Orwellian thought switching. You're told bin Laden did it, then Saddam, and now Khalid. You will forever be kept chasing bogeymen in this fashion unless the govt putting you through the chase is stopped. O'Donnell's doing what she can to stop it.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: balladeer
Date: 22 Mar 07 - 09:37 PM

Froth, I agree with you about Rosie. She is using that daytime forum of hers to draw attention to the many lies and distortions being fed to the public by the right-wing media.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: GUEST,Froth
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 08:36 PM

Now it starts to fall into place. She's generating PR for a movie. This is the new, theatrical version of Loose Change. Big money behind it:

(CBS) NEW YORK A controversial new film about 9/11 is raising eyebrows, not only for its content, but also for the people involved in the project: Rosie O'Donnell and Charlie Sheen.

The sitcom actor and talk show hostess have both become spokespeople for the 9/11 conspiracy movement.

"If the government is lying about flight 93, is it hard to believe the rest is a lie?" That line can be heard on the video "Loose Change," which has been floating around the Internet for years, but now Sheen is in talks with Magnolia Pictures to narrate a new version of the video and redistribute it.

Sheen believes the government may have been behind the attacks, and said so in a recent interview.

"I have a hard time believing a fireball traveled down the elevator over 1100 feet, and still had the explosive energy to destroy the lobby as it was described," Sheen said on "The Alex Jones Show."

Meanwhile, O'Donnell has been using her Web site to reprint excerpts from the 9/11 conspiracy site, Whatreallyhappened.com.

The conspiracy theorists believe that the government blew up the twin towers and covered up the evidence by making it appear that commercial airplanes flew into the buildings. They also believe al-Qaida had nothing to do with the attacks. "I know it's hard to imagine the government would intentionally murder almost 3000 innocent people, but once you begin to accept that possibility you can never go back to the 19 Arabs," the movie's narrator goes on to say.

James Meigs is Editor in Chief of Popular Mechanics magazine, which published a book debunking the conspiracy theories put forth in the film and online. He says "Loose Change" has no merit whatsoever.

"It is a brilliantly patched-together stew of all kinds of misconceptions, misquotes and real mistakes about how things really worked on that day," said Meigs.

Magnolia Films founder Mark Cuban, who also owns the Dallas Mavericks, said they're also looking for a film telling the other side of the story, saying "we like controversial subjects."

http://wcbstv.com/topstories/local_story_081173332.html

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Stringsinger
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 05:30 PM

I tend to defer to Noam Chomsky on this one. Someone would have leaked specific info about an inside job to the press or blogs. It's hard to keep that kind of a thing secret.

Now, did Bush benefit from 911? Damn right (the Trifecta). It gave him an excuse to invade pre-emptively a foreign country which became his Sudatenland.

Whether it was an inside job or not is really not provable and may now not be relevant.
Getting out of Iraq and bringing our troops home is, IMHO.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: GUEST,Froth
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 10:38 PM

"Whether it was an inside job or not is really not provable and may now not be relevant."

That's not even the "I did not know" Nuremburg defense. That's the "I do not WANT to know, I'm a fucking jellyfish" defense. Shameful. You stop the wars by exposing the perpetrators of 9/11. We need a REAL investigation with family members of the dead on the commission. They won't allow another coverup.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: GUEST,Froth
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 01:46 PM

From a neo-con talk show:

JOE SCARBOROUGH: ...But then you have Rosie O'Donnell saying on national television that the United States government took down the World Trade Centers, killed 3,000 Americans and did it to cover up for Enron's misdeeds. And again, the real tragedy here is that Barbara Walters, a woman who's been a real pioneer in journalism, the reason why so many people decided to become journalists is sitting there allowing this to happen on her show for ratings. It's, it is a sad, sad demise for a once great journalistic figure... But when you have somebody again who should be chiseled, who could have been chiseled into the Mount Rushmore of journalists until this, you get somebody like Barbara Walters who has lent her credibility to a woman going on national television and saying that the United States government killed 3,000 people by planting the September 11 attacks, that it was an inside job, is very disappointing as I said to a couple of media analysts last night who also agreed with me that we're seeing the sad demise of Barbara Walters. If somebody were on my show and they were a co-host of mine and they suggested that the United States government had killed 3,000 Americans on September 11 to cover up for Enron's misdeeds, I would politely say to this person: "Thank you so much for your service, to 'Scarborough Country' and MSNBC, I'm not going to see you here tomorrow night." But Barbara Walters is allowing Rosie O'Donnell to say the most extraordinary things and sadly, it's just for ratings. It's just like the Academy Award fluff show. If that's what Barbara Walters wants to do to end her career, I just think it's very sad and it's very disappointing. And I think that's, that's the real story here: The demise of a once great journalist.

http://newsbusters.org/node/11615

Walters' involvement in this affair is odd, because she's a member of the CFR, which is dedicated to the destruction of America. She's also a part owner of "The View" television program. So while the O'Donnell flap may look like a way to stimulate ratings, it could be that the CFR / globalists are finally going to allow their media to release the truth about 9/11, hoping the truth will rip the U.S. government apart. In the absence of a national govt, well, the U.N. would have to save us, wouldn't they? Interesting angles, especially the way they hype Walters while apparently criticizing her. "Mount Rushmore of journalists." lol. They're trying to make her look more trustworthy than she is, and that could be because she's about to put the stamp of approval on 9/11 skepticism. Interesting.

Old members list of anti-American globalist groups:

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/cfr-members.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: GUEST,Froth
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 09:18 PM

What's interesting about the above is that Scarborough says O'Donnell claims 9/11 was carried out "to cover up for Enron's misdeeds." O'Donnell merely pointed out that the regional SEC office was in WTC 7, along with the offices of the BATF, FBI, etc. She pointed out that the files from hundreds of ongoing criminal prosecutions were in WTC7, and now those incriminating documents are gone. But Scarborough wants you to get fixated on Enron again.

And then there's talkshow host Bill O'Reilly. He has blasted O'Donnell several times over the past week:

O'REILLY: "Impact" segment tonight: The far-left fringe has embraced the conspiracy theory that elements of the U.S. government carried out the attacks on 9/11. It's unbelievable, but that's what they're saying.

Now some mainstream individuals are buying into it. Rosie O'Donnell discussed it on her blog. And the owner of the Dallas Mavericks, billionaire Mark Cuban, may distribute a movie called "Loose Change." That piece of propaganda may be narrated by Charlie Sheen. And it says the U.S. government was criminally negligent on 9/11....

THEY WISH THIS WAS ABOUT "NEGLIGENCE". They are very scared. The govt that carried out 9/11 knows their necks are on the block. They're trying desperately to admit to negligence, but the evidence of involvement is there from training the terrorists, to shutting down NORAD, to the coverup afterwards. And they killed people from dozens of countries in the attacks, so there's nowhere to run.

Anyway, O'Reilly trots out a man who has "mafia" stamped on every other word:

BO DIETL: I was an iron worker back in the late '60s, before I became a cop.

And the whole construction of the World Trade Center was heavy, thick, steel walls around the outside, with six inches of concrete floors. And what happened that day is, when that melted, that went down, and it became like potato chips....

(The "official" reports don't mention the biggest core columns in the world holding up the towers, and this Dietl guy doesn't mention them, either. 47 columns in the center of each tower. He's KNOWINGLY lying to you. Incredible. And then they go on to threaten Charlie Sheen--tell him he won't narrate "Loose Change, Final Edition" if he knows what's good for him. Read it yourself, the link below. Bunch of amateur gangsters, scared to death. This isn't like JFK, where the "killer" was killed for closure...3000 open murders, with no statute of limitations. Everyone involved, from Hitler to Himmler, is terrified because we WON'T SHUT THE HELL UP).

http://newsbusters.org/node/11608

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Ebbie
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 09:28 PM

Guest/Froth, when you chose your moniker was it because you realized that froth has no substance?

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 10:26 PM

Good clue Ebbie!   I was also very surprised to see Froth posting some negative comments about 9/11 conspiracies. Maybe this person is starting to see the light.

I did some checking Loose Change.   If these guys directed "Casablanca" it would have been released several times with the ending changed along with the location.   The first version of the film made a big issue of "pods" strapped to the wings of the planes. When that was proven wrong, they removed the references.

Froth, you seem to have a theory on why the government would blow up the building. Any idea of why these two individuals, without prior experience, would bankroll such a movie? Do you honestly believe it was made with "loose change"?

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 11:00 PM

If I were speculating about a coverup, Ron, and I honestly believed I was onto something, and I made a film about it, then I would investigate all mysteries and anomalies. If it turned out presently that one of my theories was incorrect, then of course I would re-edit the film and remove references to that theory...otherwise I would be knowingly spreading false or misleading information.

So why do you see a problem with them making changes in the film "Loose Change" as new information comes forward?

It would indicate that they take the matter seriously and are prepared to listen to other people, wouldn't it?

At least, that is one possibility... I'm sure you can come up with some "bad" reasons for them changing the movie too, if you want to.

;-) Follow my drift? It can be seen as either "good" or "bad" that they have re-edited the film, depending entirely on which ax you are out to grind.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: GUEST,Froth
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 11:37 PM

The 9/11 debunkers have seized on a few inaccuracies in Loose Change and claimed that because the filmmakers got this fact or that fact wrong, it destroys the credibility of the whole movie. Nonsense. The filmmakers nailed the essential facts of 9/11 in an astonishingly accurate way.

But there are some inconsistencies, so they've hired David Ray Griffin to fact-check the updated version of the film. Check out his bibliography at Amazon.com. My personal opinion...THIS is why the media establishment is so terrified. Griffin has written DEVASTATING books about 9/11. The evidence he's gathered would convict anyone in a trial. The establishment is terrified. The new Loose Change is going to be Charge, Trial & Conviction to even the most glazed-over pair of eyeballs.

But then Loose Change 2nd edition is already that. Even now, no government defender can tell me why Rumsfeld and Cheney got NORAD transferred to their hands on June 1, 2001 and then put it back in the hands of the military after 9/11. That, coupled with the fact that Norman Mineta heard Dick Cheney issue override orders regarding one of the shootdowns is pretty damning. The Secretary of Transportation, ferchrissake, testified before CONGRESS that Cheney had a hand in helping one of the planes reach its target.

O'Donnell and Walters may just be hyping for publicity's sake on this...who knows. Don't care. The only thing that will restore America is a complete accounting for 9/11.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Thomas the Rhymer
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 11:42 PM

Look, Froth... If there was a time for Hysterical rants about 9/11 cothpeewathy theeowees, that time is long past. Rant a rave all you like, and for an occasional diversion, some folks may occasionally look over your posts to see if anythings changed... 'new' truths, impeccable documented research, notorized confessions... etc...

But nothing has.

...and because nothing has changed... while you treat this issue with an implacable distain for the 'ordinary truth', you can somewhat irritating... perhaps much of the time.

Everyone has questions in their heart about 9/11... and we all are dealing with that pain the best that we can.

You are not making this any easier.

C'mon... give it a rest.
ttr

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Thomas the Rhymer
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 11:50 PM

Ooops... sorry... I misspelled conthpeewathy.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 11:51 PM

"Earth to Planet Froth, Earth to Planet Froth.....(long pause - whistle, fizz, crackle).....no good, Commander, absolutely nothing. There's no intelligent life on that planet."

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: GUEST,Froth
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 11:57 PM

There are HUNDREDS of new sites springing up monthly. You won't see ABC, BBC, CBS, NPR report on them because the monied interests that created the "pain" won't allow the truth to be reported. So alternative media is having to do the reporting, and that's good because the case against the government is now infinitely more damning than it would have been if just a few national reporters were asking questions.

Here are some credible sources...I found these just tonight...

Eyewitness stuff about the Pentagon bombing:

http://thepentacon.com/

Pilots speak out about the events of 9/11:

http://www.pilotsfor911truth.org/

These are new sites, more going up daily.

9/11 was just the kickoff. You want pain, just sit around and do nothing.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 12:05 AM

Cross-stitch or crochet, that's good therapy. Yoga or Tai Chi can help too. Personally I've always found cooking one of Delia's recipes works for me when I'm a bit uptight. Alternatively, if all else fails, there's the canvas jacket and the padded cell.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: GUEST,Peace
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 12:11 AM

Froth, there are many questions in my mind, too, about 9/11. At least you aren't letting it 'disappear'. That has been so convenient for the Bush administration. All the loose ends tied up, sooo neatly. I don't agree with every site you link to, but neither do I believe your detractors have the right of it, either. I ain't yer fan, but I ain't yer enemy.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Peace
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 12:12 AM

Post above was me. Weekly cookie clean out.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Peace
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 12:14 AM

It is interesting to observe that so many people who think Bush lied and concocted reasons to invade Iraq, out-source torture and corrupt the Constitution are aghast at the thought the Government could be involved in something like 9/11. Why IS that?

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Ebbie
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 12:48 AM

Peace, in my mind they are nothing like. Iraq is a "foreign" country- and Bush is not an internationalist. He never had a passport until he became president- if he has one now. Besides, as I said before, I suspect that he really did want the experience of "going to war." Just to see what it's like, you know. The man is not bright.

9/11 is different. Bush is a man of easy tears, and these were his countrymen. I don't think Bush could ever be called intelligent - but I don't think he is absolutely evil. Some of his 'handlers' may be though. *g*

The main reason, though, that I don't believe the government did the deed is because it is not human nature to do something like it- and then to stay quiet and quiescent about it. To find just the right people to do it and keep quiet about it would be a tremendous achievement. I just don't believe it.

There are many unanswered questions about 9/11. My guess is that eventually we'll have more answers but I don't think these guys are on the right track. People- Americans, specifically - have always been real big on conspiracies, even fulminating darkly on the "alleged" deaths of popular figures, people like Valentino, James Dean, Marilyn Monroe, Elvis. Lots more. And they have just as much evidence to prove their contentions as 9/11 is bringing to light today.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 01:48 AM

Ebbie, it is entirely possible that there was a high level conspiracy, but that Bush himself was not aware of what was going on. He could have been left out of "the loop" on that, and so could any number of people. You do not need everyone in high places in a government to know what is going on with a secret operation, you only need the few key people who make it happen.

So just as a theory, nothing more than that...what if Cheney was in on it and Bush wasn't? Or what if Rumsfeld was in on it? Or some other people like that?

Bush looked to me like a man who didn't know what the hell was going on on that morning. He looked frozen in that Florida classroom, like he just didn't know what to do.

What if Mr Bush was being manipulated by some far more clever conspirators, and what if he is still being manipulated...just like a little puppet? Mr Bush strikes me as a man, who even more than many people, usually believes what he wants to believe. Such people are easily led astray.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Ebbie
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 02:08 AM

That makes sense- except that it still leaves some important dangles. Unless you're proposing that Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Rove, et al, went out in the dark of night, so to speak, and laid the explosives with their own hands, and with their limited abilities did such a bang up job, that theory leaves 10-20 men still out there.

My contention is, quite beside the fact that I don't believe that people stay quiet, even if 'bought', that only relatively few people are capable of such horrendous things, and finding enough such people to commit such things would be way beyond probability. And that's true, imo, even if they used military people.

Those people would still have to live in this world- unless one supposes 'suiciders', as Bush says, did the deed and then saw to it that they died.

Nope.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 09:56 AM

"So why do you see a problem with them making changes in the film "Loose Change" as new information comes forward?"

The problem I see is that it shows either a lack of investigative skill on the part of the filmakers - or an attempt to create propaganda to sway audiences who don't bother to think. "Evidence" should be clearly investigated and alternate sources back up theories. If one scientist says that he can prove that toothpaste cures lip cancer, would it be prudent for any news organization to go forward and issue bold headlines "Toothpaste Proven to Cure Lip Cancer"?   No journalist with any conscious would do such a thing because the realize that the information can be faulty and it is nothing more than tabloid journalism without further proof.

If you wish to see a true example of how journalism works, watch "All the Presidents Men". Decades after the event, the film portrays the intent of all serious journalists and the system of checks and balances they SHOULD be using to verify theories, or at least show plausibility.

The version of Loose Change that I watched was shoddy. I can excuse bad filmmaking in a search for the truth, but I can't excuse sloppy journalism. The producers set up Rube Goldberg theories without any evidence. The version I saw said that Flight 93 was shot down by military aircraft. I understand the new version has the flight landing in Cleveland. What? The people onboard are being held captive?   Why?????

The individuals that created this film are not uncovering the truth. They are making fanciful tales that prey upon individuals who can't think for themselves. The same individuals that clip items from celebrity blogs and websites that have little academic, scientific or social value.   I'm convinced that these individuals would believe the moon is made of cheese if Rosie O'Donnel, Charlie Sheen and an unknown blogger told them so.

These filmmakers did not create a film that "nailed the essential facts of 9/11 in an astonishingly accurate way." They created a story that is full of fluff and whimsy and could have been generated from the mind of Jules Verne or Gene Roddenberry. It is science fiction, and while science fiction could become fact - these jokers have done little to search for the truth. They created a cottage industry and I am sure they are doing nicely for themselves. Isn't this how "Blair Witch" was created after all?

I worry that chasing after rainbows like this deludes the public from the real truth and horrors of 9/11. Our government was inept, unprepared, and yes - I do think they seized the opportunity. Did they "let" it happen? I don't know, and I would like to find out. Did they "make" it happen? I have yet to see anything that would point to such a plot.   If you weigh the costs, consequences and potential downfalls - you can easily see that there were "safer" ways to get their agenda done if they chose too. Too many risks with no guaranteed payoff for this plot.

If 9/11 never really occured, this movie would have been relegated to the drive-ins as a second feature.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 04:35 PM

Ron, there are 2 general possibilities here.

1. The government is telling us the truth about 911.
2. They aren't, and it was an inside job.

If it's #2, then I suspect that some of what is in "Loose Change" is correct, but almost surely not all of it. Okay? And neither you nor I is in a position to know for sure about which is the case. We can only theorize.

Ebbie, you said "Unless you're proposing that Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Rove, et al, went out in the dark of night, so to speak, and laid the explosives with their own hands..."

Good God, no. I am proposing no such thing. What I am proposing is that a small number of powerful men like them put together a plan some considerable time (probably years) before 911 to have a Pearl Harbor-level event which would shock the American public into supporting foreign wars in Afghanistan (so the oil industry can build its pipeline through there) and in the Middle East (so they can control all the oil there). If they did put together such a plan, then it would have been instrumented by highly trained professionals, agents and paramilitary personnel, and professional hitmen whose job is killing people, following orders, and maintaining total secrecy about it. Such people exist. They have in the past assassinated heads of foreign countries, brought down foreign governments, probably assassinated some prominent politicians in the USA itself, and caused the massacre and torture of up to hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in places like Guatemala, Chile, Nicaragua, Panama, Bolivia, etc...

These are ruthless and hardened professionals, they are people who follow orders from superiors, they are in the job for life, and they are trained not to ask why. They are each just one link in a very big chain. The price of belonging in such a chain is to do what you're told and keep your mouth shut about it...or die. It's that simple. They also usually believe that their bosses have an overall plan that is necessary for some reason in order to preserve "the American way of life", so that helps motivate them. A cog in such a machine as I'm describing only knows the one little part he does. He doesn't know the larger picture. If he has second thoughts about something he's doing, he has to consider the fact that what is at stake is his career, his family, and his very life.

Plus, there can be huge financial inducements to get people to keep their mouths shut.

Furthermore, the main media outlets are controlled by a few huge conglomerates who determine what is reported, and how, and what is not. Their business is disseminating propaganda and generating sales, not telling the public the truth (unless it's a half-truth which helps push some agenda).

If anyone in the organization "talks"...the major media will not cover it (except to discount it, scoff at it, or ridicule the person). It will only surface on some internet sites or in some books that will only be seen or read by a few people whose opinions will also be given no time in the major media.

That's how it could be done. Easily. And that may be how it is being done.

I don't know, because I'm only theorizing. I'm just saying that it can be done. The people who are in charge of the government and the major media have the means to do something like that.

If you think they wouldn't do it, you're basing that assumption on faith. If I think they would, I'm basing my assumption on faith too. I have little or no faith in the reliability of the current administration or the USA media chains. I think the people in the neocon movement, the people who put together the PNAC are capable of any atrocity to further their world gameplan, specially if they panic and think they are about to lose the whole show. I think they are capable of doing worse than 911. I think they are capable of going so far as to arrange an act of nuclear terrorism in a city on North American soil. If so, it would probably be a very "liberal" city that normally votes heavily Democratic (as most big cities do). That's what you call killing two birds with one stone. In such a case, who would get the official blame for it in the American media? Iran, naturally. It would be said that Iran had sent agents, perhaps allying itself with Al Queda, and that those agents had planted the bomb. As for where the mysterious bomb came from...there could be speculation that it came from a number of possible places, such as: former Soviet Union countries, North Korea, Pakistan, or Iran itself.

If such a theory was put forth on the main American media outlets, most Americans would buy it, and you would very quickly have another war on your hands, only an even much worse one than Iraq.

All these things are possible to arrange. It only takes a few men in powerful places who are sufficiently ruthless. I believe we have such men in the US government.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 04:45 PM

By the way, take a look at this if you haven't already:

Mercenaries get the job done...

Just another example of how this administration does its work.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Peace
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 04:49 PM

The third possibility is that Bush knew SOMEthing would happen to allow him to get into Afghanistan but didn't know exactly WHAT would happen. Hence, his shock in the Florida classroom and his stunned silence for over five minutes. I think he was in what's generally called a blue funk.

Oddly enough, despite my belief that 9/11 involved some Americans at a high level, I do not think Bush was one of them. I agree with Ebbie. He is stupid to the point of being really stupid, but I don't perceive him to be evil. Some of his handlers I do see as being evil. Completely. Totally amoral bastards with agendas and goals to take over a planet--or maybe just a half of it.

I also realize that Mission Impossible was just a TV show. The retrofitting of explosives would be difficult. But someone called off NORAD. Someone gave information before the event, and the info was ignored. I don't doubt that 9/11 also contributed to the 'righteous' invasion of Iraq. Hell, Congress bought it. So did a majority of the American people. What I do know is this: we, the general public don't know jack shit about 9/11. Neither those who think it was a terrorist attack nor those who think it was a US Government attack to rally support for the Bush administration. I do not believe the Commission's report. Nor do I believe much of what Froth has posted.

But I for sure don't believe this administration has clean hands to do with it either.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 04:58 PM

Your "third" possibility is one that occurred to me also, Peace. I think he did expect something to occur to enable him to go to war...but I don't think he expected it to be that. He looked stunned to me.

Here's a quote from the stuff about Blackwater, the private paramilitary contractors who are killing people for the Bush administration in Iraq and elsewhere:

Our Mercenaries in Iraq: Blackwater Inc and Bush's Undeclared Surge. Democracy Now! [Friday, January 26th, 2007.]

On Tuesday, five employees of the private security firm Blackwater USA were killed in a violent Baghdad neighborhood. Hours later, President Bush used his State of the Union address to call on what some are calling an undeclared surge of private mercenaries in Iraq. We speak with Jeremy Scahill, author of the forthcoming "Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army."

About the book:
Meet BLACKWATER USA, the world's most secretive and powerful mercenary firm. Based in the wilderness of North Carolina, it is the fastest-growing private army on the planet with forces capable of carrying out regime change throughout the world. Blackwater protects the top US officials in Iraq and yet we know almost nothing about the firm's quasi-military operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and inside the US. Blackwater was founded by an extreme right-wing fundamentalist Christian mega-millionaire ex- Navy Seal named Erik Prince, the scion of a wealthy conservative family that bankrolls far-right-wing causes.

Blackwater is the dark story of the rise of a powerful mercenary army, ranging from the blood-soaked streets of Fallujah to rooftop firefights in Najaf to the hurricane-ravaged US gulf to Washington DC, where Blackwater executives are hailed as new heroes in the war on terror. This is an extraordinary exposé by one of America's most exciting young radical journalists.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: Peace
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 05:03 PM

The thought I had at the time I first saw Bush in that chair just frozen (right after he received the news about the attacks on the Twin Towers) was that he had the look of a man who was bewildered and shocked. Almost like someone had said, "We will do something to rouse the American people, but we will leave you out of the loop so that you can't ever say you had warning." That was what I though looking at Bush back then, and nothing has happened to change that view for me.

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 06:29 PM

I change my nomination to Rosie for Prez and Boy George for Veep!

Subject: RE: BS: Rosie O'Donnell & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 06:53 PM

If you are limiting yourself to two or three possiblities, you are shutting your mind to other options that can lead to the truth.

My thought was that when Bush sat their in silence, he was truly bewildered and had no clue as to what a president was supposed to do. In those early days, you did not hear him as much as you were seeing Guiliani on the TV. I think it was unscripted and spoke volumes about the ineptitude of Bush and his handlers.

If this were an inside job, that part of the script would have been handled without opening up questions.