Monday, March 1, 2010
The 9-11 Truther Movement
This seems to be what I call a mixed bag of tricks. Aside from
likely infiltration either to watch for dangerous sorts developing
within it, or to stymie it altogether, or other reasons, there
seem lately to be cultist types getting into the game, but aside
from all this, there are two general forms.
One goes into all manner of detail about how the planes
couldn't have taken down the buildings (wrong, you don't need
to melt only weaken steel for it to sag, slip from the points it
was attached to and start pancaking), throw in Bldg. 7
being taken down on purpose (probably true), mention in
passing that Bush knew about all this, and then focus on the
issue of explosives etc.
The other focusses on the more important question of what
Bush knew and when, the whole unsavory set of associations
incl. Bush and the Bin Laden family and holdover Nazi heirs
and assigns surrounding all this, and the profiteering by the
CIA connected firms and others who, trading on inside
knowledge of what was about to happen, got rich in stock
trades that worked only because certain companies were
negatively impacted by 9-11.
The former is what we hear about all the time. That bunch
of arguments seems to drown the other stuff out.
I wonder if that is entirely accidental.
Because it really doesn't matter if additional explosives were
involved or not.
What matters is the parapolitical milieu this happened in,
and was the product of.
By the way, that nonsense about the Pentagon and a missile,
there were eyewitnesses to a plane, the hole is only 16 feet
wide at the ground and looks a lot bigger than that farther up,
and as someone pointed out, these planes are rather fragile,
they disintegrate in that kind of situation real easy.
Mike Ruppert's "Crossing the Rubicon" and Alex Constantine's
research that continues where Mae Brussell and Dave Emory
leaves off, would be good to study. Google them.