After Bobby Kennedy

Moderators: DrVolin, 82_28, Elvis, Jeff

Postby Eldritch » Sun Jun 08, 2008 8:27 pm

You're right, 8bit.

Frankly, it makes me wonder if these inconsistencies are one of the hazards of "gate keeping." Or, maybe folks like this are just plain "wrong" sometimes—but, considering the insight with which he and several others have dealt with similar material, I can't help but wonder.
Eldritch
 
Posts: 1178
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2007 6:02 pm
Location: USA
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby 8bitagent » Sun Jun 08, 2008 10:28 pm

Eldritch wrote:You're right, 8bit.

Frankly, it makes me wonder if these inconsistencies are one of the hazards of "gate keeping." Or, maybe folks like this are just plain "wrong" sometimes—but, considering the insight with which he and several others have dealt with similar material, I can't help but wonder.


Could be an ultimate cognitive dissonant ceiling, a self gatekeeping in a way.

For instance, Naomi Wolf recently said she suspects "neocon involvement" in 9/11, yet says Bill Clinton never did any wrong and is against the "powers that be"

Naomi Klein is making headway, and doing the lecture circuit with her "governments use crisis events to push through agenda" book The Shock Doctrine...yet dismisses outright the idea that governments ever actually engineer such events

Greg Palast has no problem accusing Kissinger and CIA of complicity in the deaths of millions of; but 9/11? Oh that was Osama. Same thing with Palast, despite Palast talking about "WF-199i" and "Saudi/Bush connections".

It's almost if, the liberal/left view is that "these PAST conspiracies prove that Osama did 9/11, because look how fucked up American foreign policy has been in the PAST...so thank goodness we invaded Afghanistan, and how we need to attack Pakistan"
"Do you know who I am? I am the arm, and I sound like this..."-man from another place, twin peaks fire walk with me
User avatar
8bitagent
 
Posts: 12049
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby nathan28 » Sun Jun 08, 2008 11:04 pm

8bitagent wrote:Greg Palast has no problem accusing Kissinger and CIA of complicity in the deaths of millions of; but 9/11? Oh that was Osama. Same thing with Palast, despite Palast talking about "WF-199i" and "Saudi/Bush connections".

It's almost if, the liberal/left view is that "these PAST conspiracies prove that Osama did 9/11, because look how fucked up American foreign policy has been in the PAST...so thank goodness we invaded Afghanistan, and how we need to attack Pakistan"


The thing I can't understand is why so few journalists who do have some clout have taken the stance that maybe Osama did coordinate the attacks with non-"Al Queda" guys. Or why no one will just follow the f-ing money trail. No one. Everyone goes on and on about controlled demolition. Someone just needs to look into Riggs Bank, I mean, damn. I still think that "Who Killed John O'Neil" is one of the best takes on the whole thing partly because the director did follow the money. Why is it so implausible to even voice a mild let-it-happen-on-purpose argument that reconciles the Osama angle with the "fucked up American foreign policy"... it's not like he through out his rolodex full of the people who fucked up the foreign policy to begin with when 9/11 was cooking.

That, and I wish someone on MSM would just voice the reasonable speculation that O-dawg is dead as shit and has been for years. I mean, I can still listen to Elvis songs I haven't heard before, but that doesn't mean the King is alive.
User avatar
nathan28
 
Posts: 2957
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 6:48 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby 8bitagent » Sun Jun 08, 2008 11:25 pm

nathan28 wrote:
8bitagent wrote:Greg Palast has no problem accusing Kissinger and CIA of complicity in the deaths of millions of; but 9/11? Oh that was Osama. Same thing with Palast, despite Palast talking about "WF-199i" and "Saudi/Bush connections".

It's almost if, the liberal/left view is that "these PAST conspiracies prove that Osama did 9/11, because look how fucked up American foreign policy has been in the PAST...so thank goodness we invaded Afghanistan, and how we need to attack Pakistan"


The thing I can't understand is why so few journalists who do have some clout have taken the stance that maybe Osama did coordinate the attacks with non-"Al Queda" guys. Or why no one will just follow the f-ing money trail. No one. Everyone goes on and on about controlled demolition. Someone just needs to look into Riggs Bank, I mean, damn. I still think that "Who Killed John O'Neil" is one of the best takes on the whole thing partly because the director did follow the money. Why is it so implausible to even voice a mild let-it-happen-on-purpose argument that reconciles the Osama angle with the "fucked up American foreign policy"... it's not like he through out his rolodex full of the people who fucked up the foreign policy to begin with when 9/11 was cooking.

That, and I wish someone on MSM would just voice the reasonable speculation that O-dawg is dead as shit and has been for years. I mean, I can still listen to Elvis songs I haven't heard before, but that doesn't mean the King is alive.


You mean to ask, why BOTH journalists worth their salt, AND conspiracy/9-11 truth researchers don't focus on the REAL provable stuff?

As in, how come at every converging nexus point both financial and material(training, hosting, networking, etc) there's US linked foreign intelligence, CIA assets, etc?

All one has to do is google Omar al-Boyoumi to see the official story is crap. Or Ali Mohamed. Or Ptech. Heck you can destroy the official story of 9/11, WTC 1993 and OKC 1995 by simply googling "Melvin Lattimore".

The elite ALWAYS use willing angry anti American terrorists, of the Mcveigh or Yousef stripe. Thats the key, the plausible deniability

I have an MSNBC article that says Saudi government royals funded the hijackers through Bush ran Riggs bank AND the Saudi intelligence with an FBI informant hosted and helped some of the hijackers.

Yet you and I, to most people are the "conspiracy theorists"

*IF* we take a Who Killed John Oneil approach to looking at the converging layers of 9/11, we'll find:

BCCI
ISI
PTECH
Saudi GID
CIA assets
shell comapnies
protected terror charities
From San Diego, to Norman Oklahoma, to Florida, to Karachi, to Kandahar and to the financial hear of 9/11: Dubai....The Truth is out there.

and most of all: Bosnian jihad. Bosnian jihad(and to some extent drug smuggling) are the arteries of 9/11. Daniel Hopsicker's research, as well as Paul Thompson's stuff I find quite valuable.

I think truthers need to stop focusing so much on the neocons and controlled demolition, and radically review everything...to see that its not that "al Qaeda was falsely blamed", but that they are the favored gun tapped by the elite behind 9/11.
"Do you know who I am? I am the arm, and I sound like this..."-man from another place, twin peaks fire walk with me
User avatar
8bitagent
 
Posts: 12049
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby erosoplier » Mon Jun 09, 2008 10:22 am

I can forgive Pilger - who isn't American - for doing nothing more than following the example Americans set in cases where their leaders are murdered by secret cabals. If RFK ever actually did anything worthwhile, then America sure has a funny way of showing its appreciation. In all likelihood the people responsible for his death are not only still at large, but are still in charge.

With the full benefit of hindsight, regardless of the tears and the fanfare, in death RFK truly has been paid the respect due a man of few achievements. Given a shallow grave, even. And John Pilger - a guy who was there when RFK was shot and who, to no effect, is on record as saying that he's quite certain there was more than one shooter - is claiming, on the 40th anniversary of his death, that Kennedy actually was a man of few achievements.

Why would he do that? You would think he'd be in a position to know better. And surely the dissing and disinfoing of RFK would be neither here nor there for the bulk of his readership. Maybe I'm reading too much into this and going too far out of my way to find excuses for what he wrote, but maybe Pilger won't be overly upset to find that American readers of his piece have taken offense at the slight against RFK's memory?
User avatar
erosoplier
 
Posts: 1247
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 3:38 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby 8bitagent » Mon Jun 09, 2008 4:44 pm

erosoplier wrote:I can forgive Pilger - who isn't American - for doing nothing more than following the example Americans set in cases where their leaders are murdered by secret cabals. If RFK ever actually did anything worthwhile, then America sure has a funny way of showing its appreciation. In all likelihood the people responsible for his death are not only still at large, but are still in charge.

With the full benefit of hindsight, regardless of the tears and the fanfare, in death RFK truly has been paid the respect due a man of few achievements. Given a shallow grave, even. And John Pilger - a guy who was there when RFK was shot and who, to no effect, is on record as saying that he's quite certain there was more than one shooter - is claiming, on the 40th anniversary of his death, that Kennedy actually was a man of few achievements.

Why would he do that? You would think he'd be in a position to know better. And surely the dissing and disinfoing of RFK would be neither here nor there for the bulk of his readership. Maybe I'm reading too much into this and going too far out of my way to find excuses for what he wrote, but maybe Pilger won't be overly upset to find that American readers of his piece have taken offense at the slight against RFK's memory?


Exactly.

It's like "I was there, RFK was totally shot and killed by the powers that be elite cabal...but hey, good riddance yeah? He was just an oppurtunistic shill"
"Do you know who I am? I am the arm, and I sound like this..."-man from another place, twin peaks fire walk with me
User avatar
8bitagent
 
Posts: 12049
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby erosoplier » Mon Jun 09, 2008 6:02 pm

8bitagent wrote:
erosoplier wrote:I can forgive Pilger - who isn't American - for doing nothing more than following the example Americans set in cases where their leaders are murdered by secret cabals. If RFK ever actually did anything worthwhile, then America sure has a funny way of showing its appreciation. In all likelihood the people responsible for his death are not only still at large, but are still in charge.

With the full benefit of hindsight, regardless of the tears and the fanfare, in death RFK truly has been paid the respect due a man of few achievements. Given a shallow grave, even. And John Pilger - a guy who was there when RFK was shot and who, to no effect, is on record as saying that he's quite certain there was more than one shooter - is claiming, on the 40th anniversary of his death, that Kennedy actually was a man of few achievements.

Why would he do that? You would think he'd be in a position to know better. And surely the dissing and disinfoing of RFK would be neither here nor there for the bulk of his readership. Maybe I'm reading too much into this and going too far out of my way to find excuses for what he wrote, but maybe Pilger won't be overly upset to find that American readers of his piece have taken offense at the slight against RFK's memory?


Exactly.

It's like "I was there, RFK was totally shot and killed by the powers that be elite cabal...but hey, good riddance yeah? He was just an oppurtunistic shill"


Or like completely not exactly, depending on which way you look at it.

Just out of curiosity 8bit, what do you hope might happen if truthers "stop focusing so much on the neocons and controlled demolition, and radically review everything"?

What are your highest hopes for the truth movement? What do you hope a reassessment of the focus of the truth movement might be able to achieve in practical terms?
User avatar
erosoplier
 
Posts: 1247
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 3:38 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby 8bitagent » Mon Jun 09, 2008 7:31 pm

erosoplier wrote:
8bitagent wrote:
erosoplier wrote:I can forgive Pilger - who isn't American - for doing nothing more than following the example Americans set in cases where their leaders are murdered by secret cabals. If RFK ever actually did anything worthwhile, then America sure has a funny way of showing its appreciation. In all likelihood the people responsible for his death are not only still at large, but are still in charge.

With the full benefit of hindsight, regardless of the tears and the fanfare, in death RFK truly has been paid the respect due a man of few achievements. Given a shallow grave, even. And John Pilger - a guy who was there when RFK was shot and who, to no effect, is on record as saying that he's quite certain there was more than one shooter - is claiming, on the 40th anniversary of his death, that Kennedy actually was a man of few achievements.

Why would he do that? You would think he'd be in a position to know better. And surely the dissing and disinfoing of RFK would be neither here nor there for the bulk of his readership. Maybe I'm reading too much into this and going too far out of my way to find excuses for what he wrote, but maybe Pilger won't be overly upset to find that American readers of his piece have taken offense at the slight against RFK's memory?


Exactly.

It's like "I was there, RFK was totally shot and killed by the powers that be elite cabal...but hey, good riddance yeah? He was just an oppurtunistic shill"


Or like completely not exactly, depending on which way you look at it.

Just out of curiosity 8bit, what do you hope might happen if truthers "stop focusing so much on the neocons and controlled demolition, and radically review everything"?

What are your highest hopes for the truth movement? What do you hope a reassessment of the focus of the truth movement might be able to achieve in practical terms?


Instead of hunger strikes, bullhorns, angry near threatening letters to radio show hosts, etc...I'd love to see the face of 9/11 truth move away from the tactics and red herring "information" that they've been so stuck on...

Start writing senators, media people, journalists, etc USING THE MEDIA'S OWN ARTICLES...

Ask

"Why is the US continuing to do business with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, giving them billions and such when theyve been proven to be in on 9/11?"

"What did Moussaoui mean when he said he feels he was under an FBI sting entrapment in Norman Oklahoma, during his trial?"

"What's the true role of Ptech?"

"Why is Ali Mohamed, one of the main organizers and architects of al Qaeda as well as 1998 Embassy bombing and the WTC 1993 bombing...why is he under witness protection, a fee man in upstate new york?"

"Why hasnt been more made of the fact Ramzi Yousef was recruited by the CIA?"
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/cont ... syousefcia

"Why doesnt the media mention that Ayman al-Zawahri's brother is the head of the KLA-NLA, a splinter of al Qaeda the CIA used in the 90's to present in the Balkans conflict?"

"Why does Osama say he hates corporations, when he was a top head of Gum Arabic, Hunting Surveys Sudan, and many other big time firms...as well as accepting money from Arab corporations and government elites?"

"Why did Bush try to sell out our port security to Osama bin Laden's falcon hunting buddies in Dubai?"

"Why do all roads lead to Dubai, when it comes to where most the money for 9/11 was relegated through?"

"What else is known about the Bush family ran Riggs Bank, which was used by the Saudi royals to fund the hijackers?"

"Why did the first victim of the anthrax attacks, which came from the US army labs, happen to be the SAME tabloid in Florida that hosted the hijackers...where the photographer who died, and the owner of the Sun Tabloid both were at the same flight school when Atta was there?"

"What was Atta's REAL purpose in Hamburg in the early to mid 90's, after an elderly German couple recruited him in Cairo to be part of CDS international...where by 1995 he had an extrordinary amount of money and connections?"

"Why wasnt Wally Hillard and Rudy Dekkers links to drug trafficking thoroughly investigated?"

I mean I could go on for pages on REAL 9/11 stuff, that was in the mainstream news but never expanded upon.

Ultimately, I'd love to see the left, right, and "conspiracy" worlds come together to expose all this shit.

Obstruction of alternative energy, exposing organized child slavery and women kidnapping, the global drug trade and whose really behind it, whose really funding and financing Islamic terrorism and why, exposing the eugenics that still goes on today, getting a block on Amazon rainforest deforestation, exposing whose arming and financing African civil war and genocide, exposing all the harm and agenda of globalization, etc.

There's an endless amount of stuff that people of the right, left, centrist, "patriot", Marxist, "para politic", activist, etc side could rally against

Look how 25,000 people showed up to protest the School of Americas in Atlanta last year.
"Do you know who I am? I am the arm, and I sound like this..."-man from another place, twin peaks fire walk with me
User avatar
8bitagent
 
Posts: 12049
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby erosoplier » Tue Jun 10, 2008 2:23 am

Well 8bit, if the 9/11 truth movement were water in a bucket, I worry that what you are suggesting might amount to tipping the water out of the bucket and onto the ground.

I guess Mike Ruppert was right in saying that after 2004 there was no hope of the 9/11 crime being legally addressed. I guess he was right, but it's been a difficult thing for me to accept. The only way I can accept it is if I forgive, but refuse to forget.

The PTech kind of stuff I need to look into more - we all need to look into it more - but most of the details you mention, I really couldn't care less about. If people who care about these details ever manage to get their shit together and write concise summaries of their area of investigation and what it means in the larger scheme of things, I'd be interested to know about it. And if their area is important, then outreach really should be their highest priority I would have thought. But until then my concern is with trying to never let this sort of shit happen again, or at least with being able to see it coming down the pipeline when new attempts are made to get away with shit.

With our nose to the ground sniffing out the dastardly Saudi/Pakistani/Dubai connections to the 9/11 hijackers, I fear our collective rear will be just as exposed in the future as it was in September 2001. Because, you've got to admit 8bit, the elites you refer to have big holdings in military and industrial ventures, and I don't care how global you think they are, the clawing of money out of the public purse via these military excursions has been largely an internal US-led venture. And elites more powerful than the president may have okayed the rape of Afghanistan and Iraq, but given all of Bush's blathering about "democracy" over the years, it would be a terrible irony if the Bush administration were given a defacto pardon because those that persued them forgot to demand and enforce a bare minimum of them as part of the duties of holding office in a democracy.

While we're on the subject, 8bit, what do you think about the war crimes angle?

It's one thing to let slide the way the neocons were ready and waiting - kind of too ready and waiting - to spring into action with their war plans immediately as 9/11 happened, it's one thing to sweep aside their guilty behaviour in refusing to investigate the many "failures" which allowed 9/11 to happen as it did, but given the war crimes they have committed and are committing...surely you don't suggest we take our focus off the neocons to such an extent that they ride off into the sunset, completely unmolested by the rule of law?

Because for me, that's largely what "not forgetting" is about. I honestly no longer care if the neocons get off scott-free. I don't care if no mainstream newspaper ever says a bad thing about the neocons ever again. All I care about is that the truth slowly seeps out, regardless of what the controlled media says and does, and that we are free to say the truth. Bush and Cheney may never see the inside of a jail cell, but as long as everyone is aware that the fuckers should be in jail, that is enough.

So yeah, persue all the arcane leads you want, but don't lose sight of the big picture, because the big picture is what should guide our behaviour and actions.
User avatar
erosoplier
 
Posts: 1247
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 3:38 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby 8bitagent » Tue Jun 10, 2008 3:00 am

Yes, but *why* is there such a focus "on the neocons".

Here's Paul Wolfowitz, acting like an excited kid before Christmas, just WAITING for 9/11 to happen...saying how a "big surprise is coming" that will make naysayers who say war cant be profitable, proven wrong.

This was, eerily enough, June 2001:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcxI5wpDueE

David Rockefeller, the creator of the World Trade Center, said in 1994 that it'd take a major catastrophic event in America to help usher in a new world order. And of course other luminaries have said just as much.

But "Team B", as much as theyve *been around* in power since Ford,
I ask truthers: "How could Bush and Cheney have orchestrated 9/11 in 9 months?"

Is it, just as much more likely that its the Clinton era that was complicit?
I know that sounds taboo to say, but if you trace the al Kifah refugee center, WTC 1993 bombing, OKC, Bojinka, FBI obstruction over Yasin al Qadi and Ptech, CIA funding of al Qaeda in Bosnia, ignoring Sudan's Osama offer and information, standing down predator drones many times when Osama was in their sites, using al qaeda as CIA assets, giving Ayman al Zawahri 50 million by the CIA in 1997, the safe harboring of Ali Mohamed...

Thats all Clinton era. John Oneil and Robert Wright were being obstructed under the Clinton era, and its a shame the truthers dont research the 1993-2000 period of al Qaeda activity and the Clinton administration.

The Neocons to me are just puppets, the elite knew theyd be more than willing to take advantage of 9/11, and Osama and his pals would be more than willing to play the part of the fallguys.

Sadly, even people like Ron Paul think obstructing FBI agents from going after hijackers at flight schools is "ineptitude", when to me its hardcore proof of complicity.

As far as Ptech, it literally leads straight to the bowels of the Pentagon;
as well as the Arab elite world, European banks, drug smuggling and post PROMIS artificial intelligence.
"Do you know who I am? I am the arm, and I sound like this..."-man from another place, twin peaks fire walk with me
User avatar
8bitagent
 
Posts: 12049
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby erosoplier » Tue Jun 10, 2008 3:30 am

8bitagent wrote:Yes, but *why* is there such a focus "on the neocons".
.
.
.
The Neocons to me are just puppets, the elite knew theyd be more than willing to take advantage of 9/11, and Osama and his pals would be more than willing to play the part of the fallguys.


Well if you're not going to persue Mr Dick "The Order Still Stands" Cheney, then what exactly are you trying to achieve? He was the VP on 9/11. Doesn't that better qualify him as a target for investigation than any number of Clinton era figures who were in government during the period when 9/11 didn't happen?
User avatar
erosoplier
 
Posts: 1247
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 3:38 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby 8bitagent » Tue Jun 10, 2008 4:42 am

erosoplier wrote:
8bitagent wrote:Yes, but *why* is there such a focus "on the neocons".
.
.
.
The Neocons to me are just puppets, the elite knew theyd be more than willing to take advantage of 9/11, and Osama and his pals would be more than willing to play the part of the fallguys.


Well if you're not going to persue Mr Dick "The Order Still Stands" Cheney, then what exactly are you trying to achieve? He was the VP on 9/11. Doesn't that better qualify him as a target for investigation than any number of Clinton era figures who were in government during the period when 9/11 didn't happen?


How do some cryptic statements by Norman Mineta show 9/11 complicity with Dick Cheney?

I have long always asked the taboo question that the 9/11 commission does not answer:

Where did the idea for using planes as weapons against the WTC and Pentagon come from? Where did the idea of the WTC as a target come from?

When you study the WTC 1993 case, the Rabbi Maher Khahane assassination case, and Bojinka...it's pretty clear to me that the origins of 9/11 came before the Bush W administration, and certainly point to something deeper than Osama or Cheney.
"Do you know who I am? I am the arm, and I sound like this..."-man from another place, twin peaks fire walk with me
User avatar
8bitagent
 
Posts: 12049
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby erosoplier » Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:30 am

How do some cryptic statements by Norman Mineta show 9/11 complicity with Dick Cheney?


Well, we don't know about Mineta's cryptic statements because the inquiry didn't follow up on his testimony.

I have long always asked the taboo question that the 9/11 commission does not answer:

Where did the idea for using planes as weapons against the WTC and Pentagon come from? Where did the idea of the WTC as a target come from?


I really don't see how that's more important than the question of how the air defense and Pentagon defense failed on the actual day.

When you study the WTC 1993 case, the Rabbi Maher Khahane assassination case, and Bojinka...it's pretty clear to me that the origins of 9/11 came before the Bush W administration, and certainly point to something deeper than Osama or Cheney.


Everything in this world has prior origins. I don't see why this is a convincing argument for an unconditional pardon for the Bush syndicate.

And I take it that they get a pardon from you for being directly responsible for the killing of tens of thousands of Iraqis and Afghanis, in a horrifically violent manner, over the years since 9/11?

Like your style, 8bit.
User avatar
erosoplier
 
Posts: 1247
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 3:38 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby 8bitagent » Tue Jun 10, 2008 8:19 am

The elites who engineered 9/11 and this deep state apparatus, want people to focus all their energy on the "neocons".

"If only Bush and the neocons were pushed out, everything would be great" is unfortunately the attitude many people have(not saying you), hence why I'm almost willing to bet Obama will be installed.

It absolutely matters what the origin of 9/11, Islamic terror, and the reasons behind all of these matters lie. The neocons are absolutely responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of Afghani and Iraqi civilians, as well as endless other flagrant corruptions that even the left dare not point out.

But whose above these guys? What about the crimes of the Reagan, Bush Sr and Clinton years? How has the neocons, who are on their way out, been made to be the catcher's mit...the end all be all? It's as if, 9/11 was carefully engineered for a number of years, and the neocons were installed so as to be the second tier fallguys...the all too willing pitbulls who would be so immensely corrupt that even many of the GOP will grow tired of them and toss them out.

You read Rebuilding America's Defenses, and it speaks of "useful" race targeting bioweapons, a "Catalyzing event", etc. You take Cheney's Energy task force, the conspiracy to invade Afghanistan and Iraq, and the subversion of the constitution and you get an ocean of prosecutable criminal offenses...all tied to transnational corporate interests.

But is Cheney and Bush, really the wizards behind the curtain?

Shouldnt it matter whose above them? And when it comes to 9/11,
what exactly is proven in regards to the neocons? We look at the phanton inject blips on FAA/NORAD Screens, the intentional confusion of air defenses(which to me is more subtle than 'stand down'), etc.

It's as if the elite made 9/11 to first point to al Qaeda...or "The Jews"(Israel) But if people didnt buy that, there was always the second tier bad guys to pin it on: the neocons. But where does the real truth lie?

How much will change in 2009, once the neocons are tossed out?
"Do you know who I am? I am the arm, and I sound like this..."-man from another place, twin peaks fire walk with me
User avatar
8bitagent
 
Posts: 12049
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re:

Postby MinM » Mon Apr 30, 2012 8:42 am

seemslikeadream wrote:Larry Teeter talks about the CIA and RFK

John Pilger Confirms Multiple RFK Shooters

Image
Nina (Roman) Rhodes-Hughes joins John Pilger, Philip van Praag, Robert Joling, Thomas Noguchi, Paul Schrade, Jamie Scott Enyart, Sandy Serrano, Philip Melanson, Ted Charach, Donald Schulman et al., in confirming that there were multiple shooters.


http://justiceforkennedy.blogspot.com/2 ... tells.html

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index ... opic=19054

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index ... opic=19053

RFK killer = Thane Eugene Cesar
User avatar
MinM
 
Posts: 3275
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:16 pm
Location: Mont Saint-Michel
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests