Did NIST Edit WTC 7 Footage To Hide Evidence Of Implosion?

[zabster151]

http://www.infowars.com/did-nist-edi...-of-implosion/


http://www.infowars.com/the-real-story-pre-911-history/


This just came out thought everyone would like to see.

[JJ78]

I remember seeing a video a while back where they had some official saying "bring it down"

The same guy owned all of these buildings and he got one hell of an insurance check when this went down. It was some ungodly number over their actual value.

[warchild]

I remember seeing a video a while back where they had some official saying "bring it down"

The same guy owned all of these buildings and he got one hell of an insurance check when this went down. It was some ungodly number over their actual value.

he never said bring it down, he said pull the building, which is a term for evacuate the building. yea he did have the building insured but his insurance company has been taking him to court trying to not pay the full amount.

[zabster151]

push pull up down, building go boom from demo. does it matter what he said?

[stevey_6t9]

lol zab your still going.

[HoRuS]

I remember seeing a video a while back where they had some official saying "bring it down"

The same guy owned all of these buildings and he got one hell of an insurance check when this went down. It was some ungodly number over their actual value.

Further evidence of Building 7 being brought down by controlled demolition came from Larry Silverstein, the man who had recently taken a lease on the entire complex. In a PBS documentary from September 2002, Silverstein said he told the fire commander that the smartest thing to do was "pull it." Next, he says, they "made that decision to pull" and watched the building collapse. Pull is a term commonly used to describe using explosives to demolish a building. Silverstein allegedly made almost $500 million in profit from the collapse of Building 7.

[Nooomoto]

And I'm sure NO ONE would notice the months of preparation required to properly demolish a building. Surely no one working those offices would notice crews of men working full days for weeks in advance stripping the walls and ceilings out, and mounting explosives and det cord every where.

Have any of you ever seen the amount of work it takes to properly demolish a building? It's not some shit you can do over night in a basement.

Come on guys, common sense. Internet zealots generally aren't the best source of reliable information.

[zabster151]

well it was a building that was practically owned by the government so it would be very easy to wire the building and know body would know its there building and they planned it. they say who goes in and out.

[warchild]

Further evidence of Building 7 being brought down by controlled demolition came from Larry Silverstein, the man who had recently taken a lease on the entire complex. In a PBS documentary from September 2002, Silverstein said he told the fire commander that the smartest thing to do was "pull it." Next, he says, they "made that decision to pull" and watched the building collapse. Pull is a term commonly used to describe using explosives to demolish a building. Silverstein allegedly made almost $500 million in profit from the collapse of Building 7.

how in the world could the IC of the fire dept pull a building????

[warchild]

And I'm sure NO ONE would notice the months of preparation required to properly demolish a building. Surely no one working those offices would notice crews of men working full days for weeks in advance stripping the walls and ceilings out, and mounting explosives and det cord every where.

Have any of you ever seen the amount of work it takes to properly demolish a building? It's not some shit you can do over night in a basement.

Come on guys, common sense. Internet zealots generally aren't the best source of reliable information.

smartest comment on this thread so far.

[JJ78]

I saw a documentry on how there was molten steel for weeks after the buildings collapse.

And they were showing this type of explosive that can be painted on. It looks just like paint and it would look like they were just doing maint. And the planes or missles were used as the catalist.
No steel building has ever been brought down by fire.

Jet fuel does not burn hot enough to melt steel.

[warchild]

I saw a documentry on how there was molten steel for weeks after the buildings collapse.

And they were showing this type of explosive that can be painted on. It looks just like paint and it would look like they were just doing maint. And the planes or missles were used as the catalist.who is they?
No steel building has ever been brought down by fire.not true at all

Jet fuel does not burn hot enough to melt steel.

......

[JJ78]

Who is they? Thats a good question.

I have heard many times that there is no documentation of a steel building being brought down by fire. I could be wrong.

The patriot act would never have passed without a major terriost attack.

Have you seen the executive orders put in place since 9/11?

[JJ78]

Here are some:

http://911research.wtc7.net/post911/...ive/index.html

[JJ78]

Here are some scary ones

http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/eo/femalist.htm

[JJ78]

Those are not all sinc 9/11, but still aint right. We are supposed to be free. And be able to choose for ourselves.

[warchild]

Those are not all sinc 9/11, but still aint right. We are supposed to be free. And be able to choose for ourselves.

since its been 9yrs since 9/11, have any of these new "laws" affected you? all i had to do was get a passport

[warchild]

Who is they? Thats a good question.

I have heard many times that there is no documentation of a steel building being brought down by fire. I could be wrong.
you are wrong, all these myths you are saying have been debunked
The patriot act would never have passed without a major terriost attack.

Have you seen the executive orders put in place since 9/11?

.....

[zabster151]

Thermite was used to bring these buildings down and was also invented by what do ya know the us government

[Nooomoto]

So one of you is saying they used thermite (zabster), the other is saying they used an explosive which is painted on. How about you guys get together and come up with a real answer?

Furthermore, how the **** did they "paint" an explosive onto the steel skeletons of multiple massive buildings without stripping off the exterior/interior fascia?

Again..come on guys.

All of these 9/11 conspiracy theories have been debunked. Popular Mechanics, a hugely respected engineering publication did a massive investigation on the subject and found the events did occur as they've been told. You should probably read it. National Geographic also did an investigation and came up with the same results. Who has more credibility? Nat Geo and Pop. Mechanics...or some guys on the internet?

Here I'll make it easy for you:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech...y/news/1227842

http://channel.nationalgeographic.co...acy-vs-science


Time and time again, under scientific scrutiny, these conspiracy theories fail to come through. At this point you must either accept the facts as they are, because they are after all, scientific facts. Or ignore them, and continue with the conspiracy garbage, at which point you just become ignorant by definition.

[LawMan018]

So one of you is saying they used thermite (zabster), the other is saying they used an explosive which is painted on. How about you guys get together and come up with a real answer?

Furthermore, how the **** did they "paint" an explosive onto the steel skeletons of multiple massive buildings without stripping off the exterior/interior fascia?

Again..come on guys.

All of these 9/11 conspiracy theories have been debunked. Popular Mechanics, a hugely respected engineering publication did a massive investigation on the subject and found the events did occur as they've been told. You should probably read it. National Geographic also did an investigation and came up with the same results. Who has more credibility? Nat Geo and Pop. Mechanics...or some guys on the internet?

Here I'll make it easy for you:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech...y/news/1227842

http://channel.nationalgeographic.co...acy-vs-science


Time and time again, under scientific scrutiny, these conspiracy theories fail to come through. At this point you must either accept the facts as they are, because they are after all, scientific facts. Or ignore them, and continue with the conspiracy garbage, at which point you just become ignorant by definition.

Whoa, whoa, whoa... Isn't it blatantly obvious? You say that "someone" would have noticed construction crews prepping the building? That's precisely what the government was considering when they utilized they're newest weapon. They didn't use Thermite, as someone had said before, they used termites. Biologically engineered termites who were programmed to feast on steel were pre-released into the structure under the guise of nightfall and over the course of a few months the structural integrity of the buildign began to dissapate... and WHAM! They collapse! Seemingly from nothing at all. It's quite ingenious on the government's part for hatching such a cunning plan.

[warchild]

So one of you is saying they used thermite (zabster), the other is saying they used an explosive which is painted on. How about you guys get together and come up with a real answer?

Furthermore, how the **** did they "paint" an explosive onto the steel skeletons of multiple massive buildings without stripping off the exterior/interior fascia?

Again..come on guys.

All of these 9/11 conspiracy theories have been debunked. Popular Mechanics, a hugely respected engineering publication did a massive investigation on the subject and found the events did occur as they've been told. You should probably read it. National Geographic also did an investigation and came up with the same results. Who has more credibility? Nat Geo and Pop. Mechanics...or some guys on the internet?

Here I'll make it easy for you:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech...y/news/1227842

http://channel.nationalgeographic.co...acy-vs-science


Time and time again, under scientific scrutiny, these conspiracy theories fail to come through. At this point you must either accept the facts as they are, because they are after all, scientific facts. Or ignore them, and continue with the conspiracy garbage, at which point you just become ignorant by definition.

agreed

[JJ78]

About the Paint.

Thermite is what they were doing the demonstration with. This was on the history channel. I belive. I cant remember, but they some how turned it into a liquid and demonstrated how you could paint in onto steel beams and it melted it.

And yes I and many others have been affected by these laws. Illegal search and seizure. Holding without a lawer. Illegal wire taps.

I have frinds who were in the drug trade(marijuana) and they got ****ed by some of these laws.

Well I can also say that those publications and the people who write edit and publish are all part of the same organization. Disimformation.

[JJ78]

Ah. I just found it the Hearst family owns Popular mechanics. I think for the most part it is a very good publication, but how much history that you learned in school turned out to be complete bullshit? And Rupert Murdoch owns Fox Corp. Look up the history of these fine Americans Families. They have been running shit for ever. They have monopolies on the info that is feed to Americans.

Keepon beliving everything the news tells you and you will be as surprised as the rest of the sheep.

[JJ78]

Also, are you all not seeing a systematic collapse to our American society.

A place where our government is supposed to work for the people.

Not vote the way big business wants them to. There are so many lobbiest in Washington it aint even funny.

[warchild]

About the Paint.

Thermite is what they were doing the demonstration with. This was on the history channel. I belive. I cant remember, but they some how turned it into a liquid and demonstrated how you could paint in onto steel beams and it melted it.

And yes I and many others have been affected by these laws. Illegal search and seizure. Holding without a lawer. Illegal wire taps.

I have frinds who were in the drug trade(marijuana) and they got ****ed by some of these laws.

Well I can also say that those publications and the people who write edit and publish are all part of the same organization. Disimformation.

oh man your poor poor friends, selling illegal drugs.

[zabster151]

So one of you is saying they used thermite (zabster), the other is saying they used an explosive which is painted on. How about you guys get together and come up with a real answer?

Furthermore, how the **** did they "paint" an explosive onto the steel skeletons of multiple massive buildings without stripping off the exterior/interior fascia?

Again..come on guys.

All of these 9/11 conspiracy theories have been debunked. Popular Mechanics, a hugely respected engineering publication did a massive investigation on the subject and found the events did occur as they've been told. You should probably read it. National Geographic also did an investigation and came up with the same results. Who has more credibility? Nat Geo and Pop. Mechanics...or some guys on the internet?

Here I'll make it easy for you:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech...y/news/1227842

http://channel.nationalgeographic.co...acy-vs-science


Time and time again, under scientific scrutiny, these conspiracy theories fail to come through. At this point you must either accept the facts as they are, because they are after all, scientific facts. Or ignore them, and continue with the conspiracy garbage, at which point you just become ignorant by definition.

look up what Thermite is first . second do not use a source from a main stream channel they are all working together. and i know what your talking about when you say they have debunked ever 9/11 theory and they have not because they have never fully recreated the scenario to test and see what would really happen. they also do test that are so inaccurate its not even funny

in history no steel structure has ever fallen do to fire thats a fact steel may bend at hi temp but offive fire is not hot enough sorry


these scientist that you talk of are never going to say the truth on mainstream TV you think clear channel would let that happen nope nope.


it is clear you also get info from main stream. its sad they don't tell the truth

o yea and how does a building fall with no plane hitting it and only a small fire?

[JJ78]

Constitution is the Constitution. It is supposed to work for everyone. And I said they were and paid their debt.

[BgMc31]

Noomoto, no matter what proof you provide to Conspiracy guy, he's not going to believe it. Everything is a government conspiracy to enslave the US public and take away all rights to everyone so the rich elite can continue to drive the world into a chasm of chaos so only they can prosper. Stop feeding this troll. He'll continue to post this crap in order to bring attention to himself. I'm sure he's sitting in his moms basement jacking off to the SIMS and surfing the net looking for these vast conspiracies. Cats like this don't believe in common sense no matter how hard you try to show it to them. Just let it go and let him continue to believe this crap. Apparently it gives his life purpose. Let's just thank whatever higher power you believe in that there aren't more of these nutjobs in this country.

[stevey_6t9]

haha agreed^^

[HoRuS]

Hey guys, I just found scientific reports that say Anabolic Steroids and Human Growth Hormone is very dangerous to your health even at small doses and they give no increase in performance or muscle size. There are numerous well respected publications stating the same things and the government supports all these facts, so I guess it must all be true. Well, I just have to believe it now if the government and numerous well respected publications are stating it.

[Swifto]

I agree it takes months to demolish of prep to demolish a building, something like the WTC (all of them) would take ALOT of planning.

But what about the professor's, physics experts that argue the building DID fall like a planned demolishion? Due to the fact of the speed they both fell?

Could fire's really burn that hot to melt steel? If so, then I can see the point of each entire floor hitting the next (pancake effect) and so on, causing it to look like a planned demolishion.

But here's the real question:

Did the US government know 9/11 was going to happen and do nothing about it?

Maybe they did and didnt think planes had the capacity to collapse both WTC.

[BgMc31]

Ok, say all this is true and the US government knew about the attacks and/or building 7 was a planned demolition.

Here's the question: Why? What was the net gain? Both these wars stemming from this occurrence have been disasters. Oil prices have collapsed (even though they surged for a short time), so I'm eager to know why Bush and his boys would plan this. And something like this would take years of planning, much longer than when Bush was in office up until that time. So was it Bush I, Regan, Clinton? C'mon, I'm dying to know the logic behind such a disaster.

[jojomcgo]

Noomoto, no matter what proof you provide to Conspiracy guy, he's not going to believe it. Everything is a government conspiracy to enslave the US public and take away all rights to everyone so the rich elite can continue to drive the world into a chasm of chaos so only they can prosper. Stop feeding this troll. He'll continue to post this crap in order to bring attention to himself. I'm sure he's sitting in his moms basement jacking off to the SIMS and surfing the net looking for these vast conspiracies. Cats like this don't believe in common sense no matter how hard you try to show it to them. Just let it go and let him continue to believe this crap. Apparently it gives his life purpose. Let's just thank whatever higher power you believe in that there aren't more of these nutjobs in this country.

Yeah your right it's not like our own goverment would lie to us ARE YOU FOR REAL??

A. The San Jose Mercury News Articles

On August 18, 1996, the San Jose Mercury News published the first installment of a three-part series of articles concerning crack cocaine, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and the Nicaraguan Contra army. The introduction to the first installment of the series read:

For the better part of a decade, a San Francisco Bay Area drug ring sold tons of cocaine to the Crips and Bloods street gangs of Los Angeles and funneled millions in drug profits to a Latin American guerrilla army run by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, a Mercury News investigation has found.

This drug network opened the first pipeline between Colombia's cocaine cartels and the black neighborhoods of Los Angeles, a city now known as the "crack" capital of the world. The cocaine that flooded in helped spark a crack explosion in urban America . . . and provided the cash and connections needed for L.A.'s gangs to buy automatic weapons.

The three-day series of articles, entitled "Dark ********: The Story Behind the Crack Explosion," told the story of a Los Angeles drug operation run by Ricky Donnell Ross, described sympathetically as "a disillusioned 19-year-old . . . who, at the dawn of the 1980s, found himself adrift on the streets of South-Central Los Angeles." The Dark ******** series recounted how Ross began peddling small quantities of cocaine in the early 1980s and rapidly grew into one of the largest cocaine dealers in southern California until he was convicted of federal drug trafficking charges in March 1996. The series claimed that Ross' rise in the drug world was made possible by Oscar Danilo Blandon and Norwin Meneses, two individuals with ties to the Fuerza Democratica Nicaraguense (FDN), one group comprising the Nicaraguan Contras. Blandon and Meneses reportedly sold tons of cocaine to Ross, who in turn converted it to crack and sold it in the black communities of South Central Los Angeles. Blandon and Meneses were said to have used their drug trafficking profits to help fund the Contra army's war effort.

Stories had previously been written about the Contras' alleged ties to drug trafficking. For example, on December 20, 1985, an Associated Press article claimed that three Contra groups "engaged in cocaine trafficking, in part to help finance their war against Nicaragua." Rumors about illicit activities on the part of the Contras had also been probed in Senate hearings in the late 1980s. However, the Mercury News series contained -- or at least many readers interpreted it to contain -- a new sensational claim: that the CIA and other agencies of the United States government were responsible for the crack epidemic that ravaged black communities across the country. The newspaper articles suggested that the United States government had protected Blandon and Meneses from prosecution and either knowingly permitted them to peddle massive quantities of cocaine to the black residents of South Central Los Angeles or turned a blind eye to such activity.

The Mercury News later proclaimed that the article did not make these allegations. However, notwithstanding the Mercury News' proclamations, involvement by the CIA and the United States government in the crack crisis was implied through oblique references and the juxtaposition of certain images and phrases in the Dark ******** articles: the Contras, who purportedly received drug money from Blandon and Meneses, were referred to as the "CIA's army" and links between the CIA and the leadership of the Contra movement were repeatedly emphasized throughout the articles; the stories reported how investigations into Blandon's cocaine operation conducted by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) were allegedly dropped without cause or shunted aside for unexplained reasons; the articles told how United States prosecutors invoked the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA) to prevent certain testimony concerning Blandon from being presented to a jury in the interest of national security during Ross' federal trial; and, from August 1996 until October 1996, the image of a crack smoker silhouetted against the emblem of the CIA was emblazoned on the Mercury News web page carrying the Dark ******** stories.

The news media picked up on the Mercury News series' insinuation and made it explicit in coverage of the series. On August 20, 1996, the headline of the first article to cover the Mercury News series, published by the Associated Press, stated, "Newspaper Alleges that CIA Helped Spark Crack Cocaine Plague." It was followed by other articles and editorials declaring that the crack cocaine crisis had been created by the CIA and/or agents of the United States government: "CIA's War Against America," (Palm Beach Post, September 14, 1996); "The U.S. Government Was the First Big Crack Pusher," (Boston Globe, September 11, 1996); "Thanks to the U.S. Government, Oscar Blandon Reyes is Free and Prosperous Today; One Man is Behind L.A. Tide of Crack," (Pittsburgh Post Gazette, September 16, 1996).

Critics and commentators would later debate whether the Mercury News articles in fact accused the United States government of being responsible for the nation's crack cocaine epidemic. In an October 2, 1996, Washington Post article, Gary Webb, the reporter who wrote the Dark ******** series, asserted that the article had not claimed that the CIA knew about Blandon's drug trafficking. The Washington Post article quoted Webb as saying, "We've never pretended otherwise . . . This doesn't prove the CIA targeted black communities. It doesn't say this was ordered by the CIA.. . . Essentially, our trail stopped at the door of the CIA. They wouldn't return my phone calls." Webb would say as late as June 22, 1997, in an interview with The Revolutionary Worker, "We had The Washington Post claim that the stories were insinuating that the CIA had targeted Black America. It's been a very subtle disinformation campaign to try to tell people that these stories don't say what they say. Or that they say something else, other than what we said. So people can say, well, there's no evidence of this, you know . . . You say, well, this story doesn't prove that top CIA officials knew about it. Well, since the stories never said they did, of course they don't."(1)

According to The Washington Post, Mercury News editor Jerry Ceppos stated that he was troubled by the interpretive leap many people made about the article's claims of CIA involvement in the growth of crack cocaine. Ceppos was quoted as saying, "Certainly talk radio in a lot of cities has made the leap. We've tried to correct it wherever we could . . . People [have been] repeating the error again and again and again." Approximately a month and a half after the Dark ******** series was posted on the Mercury News website, the newspaper changed the introduction to the articles, in apparent recognition that certain wording had contributed to the misunderstanding. Rather than stating:

For the better part of a decade, a Bay Area drug ring sold tons of cocaine to the Crips and Bloods street gangs of Los Angeles and funneled millions in drug profits to a Latin American guerilla army run by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency . . .

[jojomcgo]

by the way it was a dea agent that let every one know what was going on!

[Flagg]

Ok, say all this is true and the US government knew about the attacks and/or building 7 was a planned demolition.

Here's the question: Why? What was the net gain? Both these wars stemming from this occurrence have been disasters. Oil prices have collapsed (even though they surged for a short time), so I'm eager to know why Bush and his boys would plan this. And something like this would take years of planning, much longer than when Bush was in office up until that time. So was it Bush I, Regan, Clinton? C'mon, I'm dying to know the logic behind such a disaster.

Well Bush is your classic Christian "Good ole Boy", so that could be reason enough. That being said, if this was planned (not saying it was or wasnt), prehaps certain administrations were arrogant enough to believe that we could go into Iraq and Afghanistan, curb stomp everyone within 12 months and sieze all the oil fields. That being said, no one predicted the Banks and people like Madof dragging the entire planet into a world wide recession, which of course is going to prolong the pointless Middle East War.

Zabster, even if it's true...what do you think would realistically happen? A revolution? People are so damn lazy these days, I don't think people would get off their fat arses as long as they are being fed Simon Cowel every day. And I dont think a revolution is even possible today. Maybe 50 or 100 years ago, but when you can bomb a baying mob from altitude today, what chance is there.

I don't want to sound like a conformist or a defeatist, im not...just that the times are changing and something incredibly radical would have to happen to change the mindsets of the masses. If 911 is as bogus as you say, neither you or me will ever hear about it officially in our life times.

EDIT: If people really want change, vote in Ron Paul for christ sakes...

[HoRuS]

Ok, say all this is true and the US government knew about the attacks and/or building 7 was a planned demolition.

Here's the question: Why? What was the net gain? Both these wars stemming from this occurrence have been disasters. Oil prices have collapsed (even though they surged for a short time), so I'm eager to know why Bush and his boys would plan this. And something like this would take years of planning, much longer than when Bush was in office up until that time. So was it Bush I, Regan, Clinton? C'mon, I'm dying to know the logic behind such a disaster.

As a presidential candidate, George W. Bush’s inner cabal of Zionist war hawks signed a secret Middle East war plan in the summer of 2000 that recognized that America would need to experience a “new Pearl Harbor” if their drastic plans to reshape U.S. defense policy to suit Israel’s agenda were to succeed.

The cabal of war fanatics currently advising the White House secretly planned a “transformation” of defense policy years ago, calling for war against Iraq and huge increases in military spending. A “catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor” was seen as necessary to bring about the desired transformation of the U.S. military.

The huge increases in U.S. military spending that have occurred since the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, were planned before President George W. Bush was elected by the same men who are pushing the administration's "war on terrorism" and the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Billions of dollars in additional defense spending are but the first step in the group's long-term plan to transform the U.S. military into a global army enforcing a terroristic and bloody Pax Americana around the world.

A neo-conservative Washington-based organization known as the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), funded by three foundations closely tied to Persian Gulf oil, weapons, and defense industries, drafted the war plan for U.S. global domination through military power. One of the organization's documents clearly shows that Bush and his most senior cabinet members had already planned an attack on Iraq before he took power in January 2001.

The PNAC was founded in the spring of 1997 by the well-known Zionist neo-conservatives Robert Kagan and William Kristol of the Weekly Standard. The PNAC is part of the New Citizenship Project, whose chairman is also William Kristol, and is described as "a non-profit, educational organization whose goal is to promote American global leadership." Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Jeb Bush, and Paul Wolfowitz signed a Statement of Principles of the PNAC on June 3, 1997, along with many of the other current members of Bush's "war cabinet." Wolfowitz was one of the directors of PNAC until he joined the Bush administration.

The group's essential demand was for hefty increases in defense spending. "We need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future," the statement's first principle reads. The increase in defense spending is to bring about two of the other principles: "to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values" and "to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles."

A subsequent PNAC plan entitled "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategies, Forces and Resources for a New Century," reveals that the current members of Bush's cabinet had already planned, before the 2000 presidential election, to take military control of the Gulf region whether Saddam Hussein was in power or not. The 90-page PNAC document from September 2000 says: "The United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein."

"Even should Saddam pass from the scene," the plan says U.S. military bases in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait will remain, despite domestic opposition in the Gulf states to the permanent stationing of U.S. troops. Iran, it says, "may well prove as large a threat to U.S. interests as Iraq has."

"A NEW PEARL HARBOR"

A "core mission" for the transformed U.S. military is to "fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars," according to the PNAC. The strategic "transformation" of the U.S. military into an imperialistic force of global domination would require a huge increase in defense spending to "a minimum level of 3.5 to 3.8 percent of gross domestic product, adding $15 billion to $20 billion to total defense spending annually," the PNAC plan said. "The process of transformation," the plan said, "is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event—like a new Pearl Harbor."

I asked Christopher Maletz, assistant director of the PNAC about what was meant by the need for "a new Pearl Harbor." "They needed more money to up the defense budget for raises, new arms, and future capabilities," Maletz said. "Without some disaster or catastrophic event" neither the politicians nor the military would have approved, he said.

The "new Pearl Harbor," in the form of the terror attacks of 9-11, provided the necessary catalyst to put the global war plan into effect. Congress quickly allocated $40 billion to fund the "war on terrorism" shortly after 9-11. A Pentagon spokesman told me that $17.5 billion of that initial allocation went to defense. The U.S. defense budget for 2002, including a $14.5 billion supplement, came to $345.7 billion, a nearly 12 percent increase over the 2001 defense budget. Similar significant increases in defense spending are planned for 2003 (to $365 billion) and 2004 (to at least $378 billion) in line with the PNAC plan.

“TOTAL WAR”

Veteran journalist John Pilger recently wrote about one of PNAC's founding members, Richard Perle: "I interviewed Perle when he was advising Reagan, and when he spoke about 'total war,' I mistakenly dismissed him as mad," Pilger wrote. "He recently used the term again in describing America's 'war on terror.' 'No stages,' he said. 'This is total war. We are fighting a variety of enemies. There are lots of them out there. All this talk about first we are going to do Afghanistan, then we will do Iraq . . . this is entirely the wrong way to go about it. If we just let our vision of the world go forth, and we embrace it entirely and we don't try to piece together clever diplomacy, but just wage a total war . . . our children will sing great songs about us years from now.' "

"This is a blueprint for U.S. world domination — a new world order of their making," Tam Dalyell, British parliamentarian and critic of the war policy from the Labor Party said. "These are the thought processes of fantasist Americans who want to control the world. This is garbage from think-tanks stuffed with chicken-hawks," Dalyell said, "men who have never seen the horror of war but are in love with the idea of war. I am appalled that a British Labor Prime Minister should have got into bed with a crew which has this moral standing."

[Swifto]

jojomcgo

I know your trying to prove a point, but remember there is a Rule here against rec drug talk.

[zabster151]

Noomoto, no matter what proof you provide to Conspiracy guy, he's not going to believe it. Everything is a government conspiracy to enslave the US public and take away all rights to everyone so the rich elite can continue to drive the world into a chasm of chaos so only they can prosper. Stop feeding this troll. He'll continue to post this crap in order to bring attention to himself. I'm sure he's sitting in his moms basement jacking off to the SIMS and surfing the net looking for these vast conspiracies. Cats like this don't believe in common sense no matter how hard you try to show it to them. Just let it go and let him continue to believe this crap. Apparently it gives his life purpose. Let's just thank whatever higher power you believe in that there aren't more of these nutjobs in this country.

so dumb, i rent a house with me and my girl and i have a kid. no basement i see you cant read very well or pay attention to something informing. you attack me foe putting up information that public should see and decide for them selves what happened and i'm the bad guy. its not my fault the government does this all things. man o man there is video proof documentation proof eye witness proof credible sources proof cops, fire fighters scientist, engineers, o yea i do not believe in god and the government has been killing the privet sector for years.

[zabster151]

Hey guys, I just found scientific reports that say Anabolic Steroids and Human Growth Hormone is very dangerous to your health even at small doses and they give no increase in performance or muscle size. There are numerous well respected publications stating the same things and the government supports all these facts, so I guess it must all be true. Well, I just have to believe it now if the government and numerous well respected publications are stating it.

yep he is wright Anabolic Steroids are bad for ya. that's great