No Bravery...

Welcome back!

Please, check this short video:

http://nobravery.cf.huffingtonpost.com/

This truely horrible... If every American could see with their own eyes what Bush is doing in Iraq, I guess there would be a civil war in the US. No wonder they keep such things off the mainstream media. That would definitely galvanize the nation.

And this is just the beginning of this war. I cannot image what comes next. Nuclear weapons in Iran?

Olie

Is the Above Top Secret website part of the disinformation campaign by CoIntelPro?

Welcome. Good to be back!

Today I would like to attract readers' attention yet again to the 911 issues, in particular to the Pentagon Strike.

Facts seem to point that no large plane actually hit the Pentagon. Something did indeed hit it, but nothing of the size claimed by the official sources. This is the message that pictures of the impact site convey as presented in the Flash video.

Recently, certain websites claiming to be searching for the ultimate truth about the Pentagon event are promoting yet again the idea that Boeing 757 did actually hit the Pentagon.

Not again! I thought that it was getting kind of clear to many people that there was no Boeing involved in the impact. I guess people seem to have short memory.

Now, one of such distinguished websites is the Above Top Secret. They actually started to hammer the same ol' lies that the government and the official media were feeding people right after 911. It wouldn't be a great deal as long as this site was open about being pro-gov. The plain fact is they are promoting the official version, but pose as being a source of factual and objective information. Have a look.

Header of the article in question on the ATS site reads:

"Evidence That A Boeing 757 Really Did Impact the Pentagon on 9/11"

Notice the first word - evidence. Never mind that the evidence points completely something else. Still they know how to use headlines to grab attention of readers, not mentioning search engines like Google that stores such headers in their indices and display them in search results on the first page, naturally.

The article carries on:

"Did a 757 hit the Pentagon on 9-11

First let's start with the factual information available on hand."

Again, bringing the subject of factual information at the beginning to make impression that this site is about facts and objective truth. However, after reading a few paragraphs the author makes such fantastic claims that one is left asking what the agenda of this person is? Check for yourself:

"Looking At the Big Picture
From facts contained above, we can all agree that:
The length of the outside wall on any side of the pentagon is 921 feet.
The wingspan of a 757 is 124 feet 10 inches.
Now, everyone can agree that 921/125= roughly 7.4 right?"

So far, so good. But check this out:

"Given the size of the 757, and the size of the Pentagon, the damaged area fits in perfectly with the dimensions of both the aircraft and the building."

Wow!!!! Wait a minute. What did he just say? That the evidence suggests that extent of the damage is a proof that Boeing 757 actually hit the Pentagon. Having watched the Pentagon Strike video several times I was grasping for air. Having it saved on the hardrive I chose to watch it again and nowhere have I spotted anything that could convince me I saw pieces of 757. I saw no pieces large enough. Apparently, I am wrong and my eyes deceive me. Or maybe not my eyes, but the author: CatHerder. Catchy name,isn't it?

After reading the article I have decided that there are 2 possibilities at hand: either the CatHerder is blind, or has some sight defect, or he is an agent of the government paid to promote disinformation and lies about the 911 known as the official story. Since he wrote this article I bet the latter is closer to truth.

I have taken some time and searched the net for some evidence that the ATS website has some gov connections and look what I have found posted by some curious fellow at belowtopsecret.com (another domain name associated with the ATS owners and even hosted on the same sever):

I did a trace route on http://www.abovetopsecret.com/, the Node Name is listed and maintained by the government.
IP Address 213.206.128 213.206.129 213.206.130
Node Name Gov-bb21-lan-14 Gov-bb22-lan-15 Gov-bb23-lan-16
Location Langley, Virginia
MS 60
Network Used whois.nic.mil (for military network information)
It was difficult to get the IP Address, It was spoofed and looped over 9 times. Anyway Langley, Virginia is where the CIA headquarters is. I'm more than concerned."

See what I mean!

As it turned out certain Joe Quinn has already written a rebuttal of the ATS article, so all those who are interested in some more in-depth analysis of the ATS claims about the 757 can go and read it. I will quote just a few paragraphs:

"Evidence That a Frozen Fish Didn't Impact the Pentagon on 9/11 and Neither Did a Boeing 757"

http://signs-of-the-times.org/signs/Above_Top_Secret_article.htm

"Investigation of the 9/11 attacks should be approached like any murder investigation. When confronted with a murder case (like 9/11) and a suspect that has a history of deceit and murder (like the US government and its agencies) and who had an opportunity and a motive to commit the murder, do you take as fact any claims by the suspect that he did not commit the murder? Do you seek to fit the facts around his claim that he did not commit the murder? When you confront evidence that suggests that the suspect is lying about his account of where he was and what he was doing, or you find inconsistencies and logistically impossible scenarios in his account, do you ignore these and focus only on the fact that he said he did not commit the murder and try to find and present evidence that backs up his claim to innocence? "

"The fact is that researchers coming to the 9/11 investigation after the fact, and after the case has been officially closed, are not only confronted with the task of trying to find out what actually happened - they also face the already well established public belief, by which they themselves are also influenced, that the official story is the truth. The best approach for any 9/11 researcher with honest intentions is to, if possible, wipe from their minds the official version of events and take the attitude of someone who has just returned from a 5 year trip to the outer reaches of the solar system, during which time they had no communication with planet earth. Start with a beginner's mind, turn off the sound of all the conflicting voices and their claims, and just LOOK at the evidence without prejudice."

"Now, if the person with a truly open mind is given all of the publicly available evidence and has been additionally furnished with knowledge of the effects of airplane crashes and that of missile impacts, what would such a person conclude about the most likely cause of the Pentagon damage? Of course, not all of the evidence was made available to the public, but there is still sufficient visual evidence from "ground zero" (both in terms of place and TIME), to form a pretty good "best guess". For a definitive conclusion to be reached, the "private" evidence, like the video tapes of the event that the FBI confiscated, would have to be released, and we don't expect that to happen any time soon. Of course, the fact that the definitive evidence of the videos has not been released is in itself a key piece of evidence that suggests that the official story of what hit the Pentagon is not the real story."

"The purpose of this small introduction is to prepare the reader for the fact that, in his attempted rebuttal of the no 757 at the Pentagon theory, the ATS article author, CatHerder, appears to have succumbed to the influence of the mainstream media shills that have incessantly parroted the official government story about what happened on 9/11 for the three years prior to the writing of the article. As such, he has failed to don the mantle of objective observer of the available evidence that is so crucial to finding the truth, and instead exerts a lot of effort to make the available evidence fit the government claim that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon on the morning of September 11th 2001. Either that, or he/she is part of the "official government cover-up." After you read everything below, you can make a call on that one yourself."

Interesting reading, istn't?

Truth, as it seems, is stranger than fiction.

Olie

The Meaning of March 11.

Since this Friday saw the fist anniversary of Mardid attacks, let's try to see if we can understand their meaning.

I will be quoting from this article.

"March 11, 2005 marks the first anniversary of the Madrid bombing as well as forty-two months since the false flag operation carried out by the neocons and Israel against the people of the United States and the world."

Obviously, the choice of date of Madrid attack is curious. 3/11 shows great similarity to 9/11. Does the date give us a clue about the occult/hidden meaning of these two events and their possible connetion? I think it is the case.

"We have heard two different theories given to explain the bombings. The first suggests that Mossad had a hand in it. The argument here is that bringing the bombing home to Spain, so to speak, would convince the Spanish people that the war on terror was an immediate threat to them, and, scared of further attacks, they would rush to re-elect Aznar in order to buttress the Coalition of the Willing against the Axis of Evil. In this explanation, the bombing was a black ops operation gone bad."

One good possibility. If the 9/11 event was supposed to make American people support the administration's 'War on Terror', then the 3/11 could be meant to do the same for Spanish people.

"The second theory suggests that the bombs were the work of rogue elements of a French intelligence service who wished to stir up the anti-war feelings of the Spanish to vote out Aznar's government. If this theory is correct, the operation was a success -- which opens a whole other can of worms."

Knowing French resistance to Bush's war in Iraq this could be true. But would French intelligence service use such tactics as the Mossad and CIA? Maybe this part of agency that sympathizes with USA could be capable of pulling such a dirty trick.

"Not long after the Madrid bombings, it was pointed out that there were 911 days between the attacks on September 11, 2001 and on March 11, 2004. For those who seek to read the signs, the clues offered to us by the universe to understand the workings behind the veil of illusion, this fact is suggestive.

Therein lies the clue. 911 days between attacks. Somebody must have chosen dates carefully here, which could mean the same force behind both events.

"As is the following:"

"And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him? And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months. [Rev. 13:4-5]

Bible gives us a clue here. It has been 42 months since 911 and the question remains what is going to happen after those 42 months? Soon we will know.

The Language Police - Welcome to USA 2005!

Check this one out:

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0226-27.htm

'The Language Police: Gettin' Jiggy with Frank Luntz'

by Nancy Snow

Nancy writes:

"If you need any more confirmation that America is the numero uno propaganda nation, look no further than the GOP language meistro Frank Luntz, who has produced a memorandum of "The 14 Words Never to Use." Thanks to the Internet and the blogosphere, we mere mortals can get our grubby mitts on what the conservative elite persuader Luntz is doing to scrub our brains free of individual thoughts."

My comment: Yes, most of todays news in USA is just that: propaganda. The only way any independently thinking American can get some real factual news these days is by gettin' on-line and finding some alternative news sources or reasonable blogs. However, it seems that soon even bloggin' can get you in hot water. Rummy will make sure that even this source runs dry soon.

"Consider the first word expunged from
our memory - government. It's such a bad word to Luntz that it must
be replaced by Washington. "The fact is, most Americans appreciate
their local government that picks up their trash, cleans their
streets, and provides police and transportation services. Washington
is the problem." This is why he tells members of Congress (and their
spouses!) to remind voters that Washington is the bogey man,
Washington is the problem, Washington has regulations, Washington
taxes. Hmm. Something seems fishy here. Does this mean our own
President hates his government job in Washington? If Washington is
the problem, then why doesn't the President, who represents
Washington, just step aside and let the people rule themselves?"

My comment: yeah, right! That's actually a very sound idea! Self-government. Why do we need a president or a government at all?

"But wait, there's more! Never say privatization in reference to
social security. It evokes images of fat cats on Wall Street picking
our pockets. Reserve privatization for everything else related to the
social good and collective security (education, health care, trade,
criminal justice). The better choice is personalization and personal
accounts. This sounds like 'We The People' have more control over our
private, oops, I mean personal lives. Luntz explains: "Personalizing
Social Security suggests ownership and control over your retirement
savings, while privatizing it suggests a profit motive and winners
and losers."

My comment: That's essentially what the entire privatization of social security is: stealing people's money by a few fat cats from Wall Street. I wonder what they offered Bush in exchange? A bunker?

"Getting the picture? We need to stop using the language of what happens to real people and replace it with the language of the corporation, which has no purpose other than profit and no conscience. Luntz is particularly jiggy with trade language. He implores us to stop using "foreign" or "global" and replace it with "international." Foreign is just too scary to patriotic nativists. In his memo, "The Eleven Steps to Effective Trade Communication," he says that wordsmiths must appeal to America's greatness. "Americans love being told we're the best, that we're number one. We will do anything-ANYTHING-to remain number one, and will oppose anything that undermines our superiority. It is essential in any discussion of trade to declare that we are 'the greatest economic power in the world' and that 'we will remain the greatest economic power in the world only so long as we continue to do business with other nations.'" Anyone who opposes "international" trade should be called a "defeatist" for giving up the fight to be number one. There's just a tiny step further here to calling anyone who questions the fairness and justice of certain trade agreements as, dare I say it, "un-American" or even "anti-American."

My comment: if you point out the unfairness of trade deals with USA, you are labeled anti-American? If it carries on like this, soon you can be put to jail for voicing your opinions on American global, sorry, international trade or military policy, does not really matter which one you dare to question as they are one and the same tool of global domination.

Propaganda rules, just like it did in Germany in the days prior to WWII. Are we living in the days prior to WWIII? Hard to say with certainty, but more and more signs point that we in fact may be.

Death of the American Republic...

I have just found an interesting piece of article by Richard M. Dolan. You can read it here.

He asks some interesting questions in regard to the 911 attacks. Here they are, I quote:

"For now, it is at least enough to ask:

(1) Regarding the Pentagon attack, how were bodies from the Boeing 757 identified, while at the same time 60 tons of metal supposedly vaporized?"

My comment: how about they were not identified as they were nowhere close to Pentagon. How about Wright Patterson?

"(2) Also regarding the Pentagon, how could a student pilot make a Boeing 757 jet nosedive toward the ground and then, a la Harry Potter at a quidditch match, pull up at the last moment and zoom along without radar guidance toward his target, literally inches above the ground?"

My comments: how about a small commuter jet remotely controlled?

"(3) How did that 757 – essentially a hollow tube – pierce six reinforced walls of the Pentagon fortress? No source I have read has convincingly explained how this could have happened. Incidentally, the final hole, of which there is fortunately a photograph, is remarkably well-defined, and about 7 feet in diameter."

My comments: how about explosives onboard?

"(4) Why were at least two independent video cameras of the Pentagon attack confiscated, and why are they still unavailable to the public?"

My comments: how about they hold the key to the mystery.

"(5) Why did NORAD’s standard defense procedures -- procedures which had worked efficiently for years and years, and which were activated 70 times in the 12 months before 9/11 -- fail on that single morning?"

My comments: how about by deliberate actions following instructions from the gov.

"(6) Why did Building 7 of the WTC complex -- a 47 story tall steel frame structure -- collapse as it did at 5:30 p.m. (no significant debris or aircraft hit it); and why did it sure as hell look as though it came down as a controlled demolition?"

My comments: how about the entire collapse was a controlled demolition?

"(7) What exactly did WTC landlord Larry Silverstein mean when he told PBS that he and the Fire Chief agreed at 5 p.m. to "pull" Building 7? "Pull" is construction lingo for controlled demolition. Since you can’t wire a building that quickly, ipso facto it was pre-wired. If Building 7, why not the North and South Towers? And if so, why not admit it?"

My comments: how about the WTC buildings were wired with explosives already during their contruction?

"(8) Along these lines, why would numerous witnesses on the ground in lower Manhattan, including several NYC fire fighters, speak of a series of explosions emanating from the South Tower during its collapse? Such explosions were of a kind that would be consistent with the theory of controlled demolition."

My comments: how about the South Tower was being pulled down?

"(9) What was the true relationship between Al Qaeda, the Pakistani intelligence agency ISI, and the CIA?"

My comments: how about different subsidiaries of the same world-wide secret power?

"(10) Why for an entire year did the President try to prevent a commission from forming to investigate the event?"

My comments: how about to try to avoid revealing the truth and cover his involvement?

"(11) Why did the committee itself -- appropriately referred to by Michael Ruppert as "mobbed up" friends of the President and National Security Advisor -- egregiously and steadfastly refuse to do a real investigation? (And please do not bother citing that travesty known as the 9/11 Commission Report, which deals forthrightly with none of these questions.)"

My comments: how about to confuse the public and bury the truth even deeper?

And so the story goes...

Bloggers rule...

Check this one out. The truth will always find its way to the daylight. No matter how hard those guys in the gov try to bury it.

"Gannon" scandal leads to link between high-level Republicans, high-level Democrats

I will quote a few paragraphs with comments:

"On Saturday, Feb. 12, a blogger, going by the screen-name "Do You Ever Wonder", posted the first of his discoveries as a thread on Democratic Underground.com."

Bloggers rule! I believe the blog phenomenon is starting to save the day and bring the real news to the people.

"The evidence shows that John Kerry had hired the Washington lobbying firm Quinn Gillespie & Associates to do work for his 2004 campaign.
The firm's two founding partners are each political heavy-hitters, Jack Quinn for the Democratic Party and Ed Gillespie as 2004 Republican National Committee chairman."

There you go! It is so interesting that in the biz those fellows are playing one team, while in politics they are in opposition, apparently. It is showing what these two parties really are: two fractions of the same party. So sake of appearances, I might add.

"From information gleaned from the firm's web site, it was learned that Marc Lampkin, a Quinn Gillespie lobbyist, was a Bush campaign
manager, while another employee of the firm, Bruce Andrews, was political director for the Kerry/Edwards coordinating committee in
Pennsylvania. Yet another employee, Manuel Ortiz, was involved in the overall leadership structure of the Democratic Party, including both policy and fundraising, raising money for Kerry."

How convenient this was for Bush and Kerry. Is this really democracy or a mockery? The same firm runs the election for both camps.

"A large, influential public relations firm such as this might normally have clients of all political persuasions, and were it not a
presidential election year, it would raise nary an eyebrow. However, for the chair of the Republican National Committee (even though
Gillespie officially took "unpaid leave" from his firm to work on Bush's 2004 campaign) to be just one degree removed from the Kerry
campaign, casts a shadow of suspicion regarding possible collusion between the Democratic and Republican parties. At the very least, it
represents an obvious conflict of interest."

Shall I suggest that it is just ONE party and the election show is just for the people to believe they live in democracy, while in actuality these two powers are in bed with each other.

Just my 2 cents.

The second wave on its way...

Today I have found an interesting article by John Kaminski. It is titled 'The second wave'. I would like to quote some parts of it.

He writes:

"And people began calling me, telling me about their meetings. I didn't dare believe it was a second wave. But the calls kept coming."

"The first thought I had was that the second wave shouldn't make the same mistakes the first wave did. The first wave failed. The perps, so far, have gotten away with their evil deeds. In fact, one of the so-called leaders of the first wave, Mike Ruppert, has declared the 9/11 issue dead. Good. He's retired. We don't need him. He was the prime saboteur of the first wave, ruining the first big 9/11 forum in San Francisco with his oil company propaganda."

As you see, John being a good observer as he is, has formulated a similar opinion on Mike Ruppert as I was presenting in my previous post. Good to know that this was not just a single opinion of mine or some other fringe observers, but it is shared by as esteemed journalist of alternative press as John. He carries on:

"The second wave should know that peak oil has nothing to do with 9/11. It's a disinformational distraction. Peak oil is a trend that may or may not be true. Most honest people think it's just another oil company ruse to jack up prices. But even if it is a serious social problem, it has nothing to do with 9/11, the crime of the century, about which most of the public has been told nothing but lies."

Right. Peak oil issue is exactly that, a distraction, to take people's attention away from the real issue, which is:

"Our leaders lied about what happened. They refused to hold an investigation. They destroyed the evidence. They hid the videotapes. They blamed Muslims but didn't to this day produce a shred of evidence against them. They deceived our own air defenses with bogus drills designed to confuse everyone. They invented fantastic cellphone calls. They met with terrorists and let important witnesses slip out of the country. The list of their deceptive maneuvers is nearly endless."

I think he really nails it here. The entire official version of 911 attacks is a scam or a very good con art. It is amazing what spin official media managed to doctor about 911 and many people swollowed it. I guess the truth will be eventually revealed and I wonder what the crazy Neocons in D.C. will do then? I take a guess: blame the Israel. You do not believe it is possible?

Wait and see. Just you wait...

The Pentagon Strike...

Hi there, I am back.

I strongly advise anybody trying to get to the bottom of 911 attacks to view the Pentagon Strike Flash Presentation, if he or she has not done it yet.

In previous post I was trying to draw my readers' attention to the mess within the 911 Truth Movement. Today, I plan to do the same with the Pentagon Strike, based on above mentioned presentation.

My estimations as to how many people in the world actually saw this curious presentation range from 200 to 300 million people worldwide. In other words between 3,5 and 5 % of world's population. This is just a wild guess, based my alternative sources.

Now, the reason I like this presentation is that it brings together facts and a good piece of detective work on behalf of the creator. It also uses the visual evidence which the Powers That Be are trying to hide as much as they can.

There are some essential aspects of the Pentagon attack that need to be answered. One of them is the location of impact. Whatever hit the Pentagon, it has targeted the area generally used by the Navy, or to be more precise the Office of Naval Intelligence. I can't help but wonder if that was by design. Defense Department is not really in full control of the Navy, which maintains its relative independence. I guess some folks in the Pentagon do not like it too much and here we may actually have a motive to strike this section of the building as well as of the military.

The Office of Naval Intelligence is older than most of the post-war US agencies and thus enjoys relative respect and independence. It flies below the radar, so to say. The war centered plans of the Pentagon are not necessarily supported by the Navy and Rummy must really struggle to get those guys on his side. I would like to mention that the Philadelphia Experiment was carried out by the Navy and I would imagine that the Navy learned a lot from it, thus becoming even stronger force in the US military.

Anyhow, I just wonder why this particular section of the Pentagon building was hit and assuming it happened for a reason, what reason is that? Could it actually point to the real perpetrators of the 911 event? Could be.

Enjoy the presentation...

The 911 Truth Movement.

Welcome to this blog!

I am really getting tired of the 911 Truth Movement. Having read lots of articles, having listened to numerous field researchers, activists and even witnesses, I have come to the realization that the 911 Truth Movement is not about revealing the truth about the 911 attacks, but actually about burying it even deeper in the sheer volume of information, or shall I say disinformation. Nowadays there is more so much information circling the net about the issue that getting to the bottom of it is quite impossible. In fact, I figured that it is by design so.

During my Internet search I have come across quite an interesting article shedding some light on the 911 Truth Movement. It is titled "Ruppert and Hopsicker Co-Opting the 9-11 Truth Movement". You can find it here:

http://signs-of-the-times.org/signs/exposing_the_big_con.htm

These folks are an alternative news source and I must say they really dig deep into 911 related matters.

This is what these guys have to say about the main players of the 911 Truth Movement:

"The more we look into the backgrounds of the main players involved in 9-11 research, the more links we find. Ruppert was a member of Hopsicker’s CIA drug running online discussion list. It is interesting therefore that Hopsicker and Ruppert have since had somewhat of a falling out in recent months, mainly due to information that Hopsicker dug up on Pinnacle Quest International (PQI), a company offering "little-known insider secrets of wealth creation" to its customers and from which Ruppert had accepted 4 all expenses paid trips to Cancun with a $1,000 dollar speaking fee. Hopsicker claims that PQI runs scam operations, and with a price tag of $7,500 for 21 CDs, we tend to agree with him. Unsurprisingly, as a result of this interaction with Hopsicker, Ruppert threatened to sue."

Me: Having observed through the Internet interactions of many players within the Movement I was often puzzled by the fact that they often work against each other instead of joining forces. However, taking the above example of the two gentlemen into consideration I started to understand that this apparent hostility tries to cover the fact that they used to "work" together and played in the same team with the CIA in the background. How suprising. Well, not really.

Through this apparent hostility they successfully hide their past, don't they? They also take the attention away from the real issues related to the 911 attacks, in my opinion. They are like two magicians trying to attract attention of the audience to some desired place, while the place of real action is missing the scrutiny of many eyes.

Here is another interesting quote that seems to confirm my theory:

"Now all of this gives the impression that Hopsicker and Ruppert are on opposing sides and one of them is telling the truth and the other is selling the lie. But as I have already mentioned, nothing is ever that simple in the world of CoIntelPro. You see, even with his "peak oil" slant, Ruppert and his message ran the risk of being just one more voice in the melee of 9-11 investigators and investigations currently entrenched on the internet. In the world of CoIntelPro, there are many ways to draw attention to the lie that you have to sell, and each particular method is tailored to be most effective in deceiving a specific audience. In the case of the conspiratorially-aware members of the alternative news communities on the net, one way to draw attention to disinformation is to have someone attack it AS disinformation."

Me: So, apparently the two gentlemen are fighting each other, while in reality they are two members of the same team. This article seems to even suggest that they are agents of the Counter Intelligence Program. Well, honestly, I would not be surprised if it were in fact true.

"Looking at the current infighting going on at present, it would appear that CoIntelPro agents have done a fine job. No one knows who is who anymore, everyone suspects everyone else, and those members of the public whose minds are not, as yet, welded shut will be the ones to suffer most from the lack of coherent information about what really happened on 911, who really is to blame, or what the real issue is."

Exactly. That's what I was frustrated with when I was researching the issue of 911 attacks. There is such a noise level that it is nearly impossible to find anything of value. But I guess it is so by design.

By the way, did you know that this Ruppert guy is supporting the population reduction? Check his own words:

"I advocate an immediate convening of political, economic, spiritual and scientific leaders from all nations to address the issue of Peak Oil (and Gas) and its immediate implications for economic collapse, massive famine and climate destruction (partially as a result of reversion to coal plants which accelerate global warming). This would, scientifically speaking, include immediate steps to arrive at a crash program – agreed to by all nations and in accordance with the highest spiritual and ethical principles – to stop global population growth and to arrive at the best possible and most ethical program of population reduction as a painful choice made by all of humanity."

Painful choice? Population reduction? This guy is really going too far. I bet he is not including himself in the group of those to be reduced, or should I say killed.

Anyhow, the article says some more interesting things about the 911 attacks and research related to it:

"For any 9-11 investigator to come out and say that a 757 plane definitely hit the Pentagon is to rob the public of the singularly most important aspect of 9-11 and the one that has the chance to blow the whole dastardly plot wide open."

"Certainly, there is much evidence that shows that Flight 11 and Flight 175 really did hit the twin towers, forcing 9-11 investigators to resort to other, and less convincing, aspects of the events of that day to make their case that it was an inside job."

"This brings us to the point about the Pentagon attack which is that there exists striking evidence to suggest that it was NOT a 757 that hit the Pentagon, and it is for this very reason that Flight 77 presents THE best opportunity to bring the 9-11 deception to public awareness."

I really think that the Pentagon strike is the key issue to understand the 911 genesis and anybody trying to downplay the importance of it is in actuality deceiving the public and his/her intentions should be examined.