9/11 "Researcher": Hillary Clinton mastermind of 9/11, Simpson murders????

[Bolo Boffin]

A major 9/11 website, cited often in debates here at DU, has this to say about many interesting events in the past few years:

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/not_crashed.htm

We now know Flight 77 was not crashed into the Pentagon.

An F-16 flew over the Boeing 757 for a while, and then the airliner was diverted with transponder off, flown by remote control to either crash site or a landing site known only to the 911 perpetrators. Passengers and crew may be alive or may have been alive as captives some days following September 11.

I know this is far-fetched. I know this is not what the families of the victims need to hear right now. But there is a possibility that kidnap victims are being held somewhere and my responsibility is to them if they exist (and I think they may.)

When I leered that Hillary Clinton's severest biographer critic, Barbara Olsen was on Flight 77 it became important to learn what business put her on Flight 77 to Los Angeles on September 11. From now on the passengers of flight 77 must be considered possible kidnap victims. The amorality and arrogance of the criminal elites responsible for the 911 frame-up make this a reasonable suspicion and avenue of investigation. But another theory that must be also be tested against the facts involves a willing cell-phone actress. Intelligent internet discussants of every political stripe are concluding that Flight 77 was not destroyed at the Pentagon. We must determine where the abductors took that plane.

I have long been convinced that Hillary Clinton was behind the Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman murders that created the distraction the night before the very day Hillary became the first First Lady to testify in a criminal investigation. I also know that she was involved in serious economic crime when she received criminal payment for corrupt services in the form of a million-to-one (i.e. impossible to come by honestly) illegally manipulated first-timer bonanza killing in the commodities futures speculation. Also, that she had one of the Secret Service men she detested, a man who might have heard too much, transferred to Okalahoma city -- to perish in the bombing of the Murrah Federal Building there, even as the drug-trade-dealing BATF chose to be away from the office that day. And there is the Vince Foster murder. If Mrs. Olsen is in the hands of Hillary Clinton and her associates now, I am sure she would much rather be in the Atlantic trench.

Ever wonder about all the unaccounted-for time that Bill Clinton (that closet Bush man and cfr stooge and hit man) spent in Harlem, New York prior to September 11.

It's time for the many who know about these crimes to come forward -- but come forward to the internet first -- it is the people, not the criminals who need to hear your story.

Is this the kind of thinking we like to encourage at the Democratic Underground?

[papau]

1. A Fun site - sadly almost all is explained away elsewhere on web

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/flight77.htm

He does not discuss/touch the folks that saw the plane (a large object with wings)fly into Pentagon.

I did like the conclusion - that indeed does follow from the cruise missle theory - that those on the plan must be kidnapped.

And I like a "who benefits" analysis that sees Barb Olsen as the reason Hillary brought the plane down

Of course if Olsen is not dead, Hillary did not benefit - but why let that stop us! :-)

A fun site - good photos.

[Caution]

2. he may be a loon but

even a loon can occasionally do credible research. Usage of the primary materials he comes up with is fine, usage of crackpot theories is not. I try to stay tin hat free as much as possible but to deny that there are serious questions about what happened that day would be foolish. I think this particular site is past the border between sanity and insanity, but there are nuggets of truth in the ravings of madmen occasionally

[mistertrickster]

3. Granted, the writer of this clearly has a tenuous grip on reality.

He ought to look up "Ockham's Razor" (sometimes spelled "Occam") sometime--the simplest explanation is usually correct.

However, it does indicate the sociological phenomonon of how a significant minority of Americans don't believe anything the gov't says or media reports (heh, same thing!) because they've been lied to so much in the past.

[Gman]

4. If Babs Olsen was kidnapped, Ted couldn't give a rat's ass

because he had a new young babe on his arm a month later.

[Abe Linkman]

5. It's called disinformation, and it works, too.

I've always heard that people like the gentleman you provided the link for, are nothing more than harmless folks whose alleged craziness is useful in disinformation campaigns.

Funny how I don't recall anyone else here ever mentioning those stories. May I ask why you think it's relevant to do so?

[acerbic]

6. To me it's pretty obvious why it's relevant

Funny how I don't recall anyone else here ever mentioning those stories. May I ask why you think it's relevant to do so?

That freepy kook site has been touted as some kind of credible source by the Believers here, e.g. in this thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=125&topic_id=405&mesg_id=405

[DulceDecorum]

9. Re: Credible sources

There are several things that must be pointed out at this point. First, many do not realize that the origin of lycanthropy is found in what God did to Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel 4:4-16 and 31-35. Verse 16 says, "Let his heart be changed from man's, and let a beast's heart be given unto him…" For seven years Nebuchadnezzar wandered the fields, ate grass and behaved like an animal. Now, my point is this. Satan often tries to counterfeit the power of God! Occult lycanthropy is the Devil’s imitation of God’s power.
http://logosresourcepages.org/m_heroes.htm

Let's read that last bit again:
Satan often tries to counterfeit the power of God!
Occult lycanthropy is the Devil’s imitation of God’s power.

Holy Lycanthropist!
Way to go!!
Halleluuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuujah!!!

[Bolo Boffin]

10. Hmmm. Contacting my DulceDecorum muse...

This is a tough one. Evidently Dulce saw that I've been granted a measure of understanding him/her, and s/he's gone all out to be confusing.

Okay, the thread's about Dick Eastman's crazy views and how that affects his 9/11 research. Why we should take anything a man who believes Hillary Clinton to have instigated the OJ murders, I don't know. And there's not a lot of people rushing to his defense.

Now this branch of the thread is the estimable Abe_Linkman, who says basically that some harmless crazies get used by disinfo guys (know of any old Abe, that might be lurking around here? Maybe you should contact DU moderators with your evidence) to impeach real investigators.

Acerbic countered with the fact that many "real investigators" quote Mr. Eastman without any disclaimers, as if he were a real investigator.

Now Dulce, dear Dulce, chimes in about occult lycanthropy. The Devil imitates the power of God. Perhaps this means that s/he believes Eastman to have been planted by the Bush disinfo people - that Mr Eastman is a "sockpuppet" used to mimic the "real investigators," but that Mr. Eastman is actually a BushCo disinfo guy.

Unfortunately for DD, if this is what s/he means, Mr. Eastman is a long established presence in the conspiracy network. His writings are flung far and wide across the Internet. Not even Hillary Clinton could have gotten the details of Mr. Eastman's massive correspondance distributed so pervasively. Only the real Mr. Eastman could have built such a virtual library over such a wide range of time. So he is not a sockpuppet, and he is not a BushCo plant. He's the real deal.

Perhaps then the person that brought Mr. Eastman to our attention is the lycanthrope DD is warning us about. It could be me. I started the thread. And if it is me, then DD is accusing me of being a disinfo agent without a shred of proof, and hence the completely oblique and confusing text that s/he uses - s/he doesn't want to risk open censure.

But I don't think so. Why? There's a better suspect: Dancing_Dave.

It was Dancing_Dave's reference to the writings of Mr. Eastman that alerted me to them. When I published the remarks without reference to the author (other than the link, look above, it's there), Dancing_Dave began this whole charade of "Well, I sure hope that's not Dick Eastman. Dick's a fine investigator, yadda, yadda, yadda." A simple click of the link would have confirmed that yes, it was Dick Eastman who believed such nonsense. And yet Dave repeated his disbelief, and ran around to other threads, and started hoorahing the whole 9/11 conspiracy effort.

But isn't there a marked insincerity of heart that Dave is lacking? Perhaps the lycanthrope doth howl too much?

Nah, Dulce probably just meant me. Wrong again...

PS: what a wacked out website that was, Dulce! Thanks for sharing...Holy Lycanthropist, indeed... :thumbsup:

[DulceDecorum]

11. Howlingly funny

Are you insinuating that the Good Pastor is wrong?

And this from a "real investigator" who insists that the good, honest, highly credible Barbara Olson called her husband Ted from the plane using we-know-not-what.
And today you have chosen to defend Hilary from slander?

Tell us Bolo,
are you a good werewolf or a bad werewolf?

[QuietStorm]

20. lol now that IS funny

[Bolo Boffin]

26. I've never claimed that Barbara Olson was good, honest...

...or highly credible. Ever.

I'm just saying she made a damn phone call or two to her husband on the day she died. It's not that hard to believe.

[QuietStorm]

32. oh I see you believe flight 77 hit the pentagon?

well that explains now why you have expended so much energy trying to humiliate Eastman. Aside from this hillary theory. can you direct me to a thread within this 9/11 forum where Dick Eastmans' current two plane theory has been discussed. I would be interested in reading through THAT thread or is it in trying to distract us from that research you find strategically it most beneficial to your employers to keep us focused no the Hillary theory?

Where is the investigative discussion regarding Eastman's two plane theory. Not discussion on his character or is body of work JUST discussion on that theory. Or has the 9/11 investigation time on DU never actually discussed that theory with any real intelligence. Not the author but the theory itself. All in all as I have stated already the behavior displayed here strikes me as status quo smallmindedness and very tactical as well.

[Bolo Boffin]

38. Eastman doesn't have a two plane theory - it's a three plane theory.

The Boeing, the fighter jet (remote controlled) that shot the missile, and the C130. All three are involved in this spectacular flight that's precisely coordinated to make the Boeing seem like it flew into the Pentagon, when it was actually the fighter jet that crashed into the wall (having first shot a missile into the wall to breach it).

Now I've also seen Eastman talk about a helicopter flying around in the midst of the aerobatics. So that would make it a FOUR plane theory. And the reason that the theory isn't being discussed with any real intelligence is because people with real intelligence recognize it as nonsense.

...is it in trying to distract us from that research you find strategically it most beneficial to your employers to keep us focused no the Hillary theory?

My employers don't derive any benefit or harm from a discussion of that research. Why would you think that they do? This is something I do in my spare time.

[Abe Linkman]

34. I don't blame you, PRbolo

"It's not that hard to believe."

What is it about a couple of phone calls that gets people so upset? They act like these were some kind of "special" calls, don't they. Has anyone at your organization ever shown you evidence that those calls actually took place? If so, would you provide that evidence here, and give us names of who showed it to you?

[Bolo Boffin]

37. My organization?

Whatever could you mean? I'm a member of a screenwriting organization. The subject of Barbara Olson's telephone calls never comes up there - we just talk about writing screenplays and whatnot.

[Abe Linkman]

41. Serious question for you, boloboffin

Screenwriting is your vocation? How do you have the time to research 9/11, and how do you know so much about government?

[Bolo Boffin]

42. The neat thing about screenwriting...

...is any topic you want to investigate, you can. It might show up in a movie or not.

Actually, my vocation is theater actor. Right now, I support my theater habit by managing a small mom-and-pop restaurant. I'm hoping screenwriting will be a better source of revenue.

I know so much about government, because I'm an avid reader, and had a great education. This might be the craziest thing I've ever written here, but it was in Alabama public schools. My mother bought me a precursor to Hooked on Phonics when I was three, and by four I was reading on a second to third grade level. I can remember having to attend a private school for the first grade, one of those white flight academies founded in the sixties, because I was too young to make the cut for public school. I would go into the twelfth grade classroom and read to them from their books. (I don't think of that as bragging - it's more a comment on the academic nature of most of those institutions in the South.) In public school, the whole language approach was used, and by third grade I was a natural speed reader (I took the recent Harry Potter book down in six hours). I consumed the various family libraries I found, and one of those books was on the American government - the Constitution, The Bill of Rights, all that stuff that America is supposed to be, and strives for in her best moments. Anyway, I was perfectly cast as the absentminded professor during my entire school career, and became many a teacher's favorite student, because I would listen to them and picked up the coursework pretty easily.

[Abe Linkman]

12. They come in many disguises, don't they, Bolo...

"(know of any old Abe, that might be lurking around here? Maybe you should contact DU moderators with your evidence) to impeach real investigators."

Would you confess, if YOU'RE a disinfo agent? How about PR person? Or, are you a "real" investigator? If that's what you are, what is it that YOU want to know about 9/11? Don't you already know more about it than the rest of us?

[Bolo Boffin]

27. Yes, I'm a step or two ahead of you and a few others here, Abe

I accept plain facts (WTC collapsed from damage only, Flight 77 hit the Pentagon). It frees me up to ask the real questions. You should try it sometime.

[Abe Linkman]

29. Right. WHAT questions. bolospinner?

You spin a lot, and you question why people question what happened on 9/11, and why people question the motivations of certain posters here, but that's about it, isn't it bolospinner?

[Bolo Boffin]

39. Old DU Forum: the Top Ten Smoking Guns thread

I have a post there about the things that give me pause about the events of 9/11. Dated Nov-27-02, 05:43 PM. Here's a link to it:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=5326&forum=DCForumID43&omm=27

And here it is reproduced, spelling corrected.

1) After hearing confirmation of the attack on America, George W. Bush's first instinct and priority was to sit tight at his photo op.

2) Why weren't fighter jets scrambled immediately to rendevous with hijacked planes?

3) Ashcroft's echewal of public air transportation in July 2001

4) The shelving of the final Hart-Rudman Commission Report on Terrorism

5) Bush family ties to the oil industry and Saudi Arabia

6) Bush Administration resistance to 9/11 independent commission

7) Bush Adminstration co-opting of "independent" commission when he got to choose the tie vote

8) Appointment of a war criminal (Kissinger) to be the tie vote in the "independant" commission

9) The theft of the 2000 presidential election by the son of Desert Storm commander-in-chief

10) Appointment of Desert Storm officials to high posts in Cabinet (Powell, Rumsfeld, Cheney (well, Cheney wasn't appointed by Bush, but you know what I mean).

PS: these are not in order of any preference. This is just the order that I thought of them. Poindexter (another war criminal) in charge of Big Brother (IAO) is another mind-boggler for me. The rape of the Freedom of Information Act is another. Perhaps I should include the disinformation efforts of theories like "no plane" or Vreelanderism, but I do so making no judgment call on advocates of those positions here. I have in the past, but no longer.

I'd change the wording of some of these, too. Instead of Desert Storm officials, I'd talk about the PNAC members who are riddling this administration.

Under number 5, I'd talk about the missing 28 pages from the 9/11 report, especially John Dean's incisive article about showing just how much Bush had to have known (or is responsible for having known) about the coming Al Qaeda attacks. Where's the link for that article?

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20030729.html

Watch how easily Bush is ensnared in this article. We don't need controlled explosives, we don't need four planes doing the Loop-de-Lou over the Pentagon, we need analysis like this:

The president's briefing of August 6, 2001 was the subject of public discussion even before the Inquiry started its work. As the 9/11 Report notes in a footnote (at page 206), "National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice stated in a May 16, 2002 press briefing that, on August 6, 2001, the President Daily Brief (PDB) included information about Bin Laden's methods of operation from a historical perspective dating back to 1997." (Emphasis added.)

Okay, see that? From Condoleezza's own lips, the PDB on August 6 talked about the history of Bin Laden's MOs in terrorism, from 1997 until August 2001. John Dean goes on to list Al Qaeda operations in that time period:

What exactly did it say? We cannot know. But the Inquiry's 9/11 Report lays out all such threats, over that time period, in thirty-six bullet point summaries. It is only necessary to cite a few of these to see the problem:

• In September 1998, the obtained information that Bin Laden's next operation might involve flying an explosive-laden aircraft into a U.S. airport and detonating it. (Emphasis added.)
  
• In the fall of 1998, the obtained information concerning a Bin Laden plot involving aircraft in the New York and Washington, D.C. areas.
  
• In March 2000, the obtained information regarding the types of targets that operatives of Bin Laden's network might strike. The Statute of Liberty was specifically mentioned , as were skyscrapers, ports, airports, and nuclear power plans. (Emphasis added.)

In sum, the 9/11 Report of the Congressional Inquiry indicates that the intelligence community was very aware that Bin Laden might fly an airplane into an American skyscraper.

You see? This Administration has been caught dead to rights in a lie, a shocking lie - unless they want to claim that their "historical overview of Bin Laden's MOs" didn't include this material, and that would be gross imcompetence and negligence that's just as damaging.

Bush knew. By this, I mean, Bush should have known, Bush had every available means of knowing, short of John O'Neill shoving the Phoenix memo into his face and screaming, "They're going to hijack planes and crash them into buildings!" He is responsible for the gross failures of intelligence that allowed the 9/11 attacks to happen. He is the worst President in history.

And if you keep diddling around with four plane theories and controlled explosives at the WTC, he's going to get another four years. We need every hand available to get the truth out to the American public. The dedication and passion of each 9/11 researcher here would be so useful in the real struggle.

[Abe Linkman]

40. In other words, you ...

accept and sell the Official Story. Plenty of people from your side ask questions about intelligence failures and so forth. Shows you're really just an objective seeker of truth.

[Bolo Boffin]

44. I accept the basics of the Official Story, but...

...I see plenty of loose threads and gaping holes. Should we chase a few of the more credible leads and something fouler gets caught in the net of truth, we'll hoist that bastard's head high on a pole as well. And I firmly believe that the truth will out. I'm confident that a Democratic candidate can win the next presidential election and clean out the Aegean stables of the Bush Administration's secrecy. Remember, all the Iran-Contra papers, plus the entire paperwork of the Bush I administration is only held back now by W's executive order. A Dem can abolish that order and the flood of information will flow - the FOIA can be restored to its proper use, and the whole damn mess will out.

Want your evidence? Get the Democratic candidate elected in 2004, and if it's not one of these DLC Keystoners, the more's the better.

[acerbic]

13. What ever happened to the shapeshifting lizard people?

Did the werewolves eat them?

[LARED]

15. Nope

Amazingly the shape shifting lizard people are found here, (sans werewolf's) and BushCo is neck deep in it.

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/6583/et042.html

Cathy writes in "Trance Formation Of America" of how George Bush was sitting in front of her in his office in Washington DC when, he opened a book at a page depicting lizard-like aliens from a far off, deep space place. Bush then claimed to be an 'alien' himself and appeared, before her eyes, to transform 'like a chameleon' into a reptile. Cathy believed that some kind of hologram had been activated to achieve this and from her understanding at the time I can see why she rationalized her experience in this way.

Not only BushCo, but Hillary and Bill are under reptilian control as well.

Leading Brotherhood families like the Rothschilds and the Windsors are full-bloods reptilians wearing human physical bodies like an overcoat in the full knowledge of who they are and the Agenda they are seeking to implement. Another comment the psychic lady made was that in her altered state of consciousness, Hillary Clinton appeared as a reptile, while her husband, Bill Clinton the US President, was only overshadowed, and controlled by one. This is interesting because my own research, and that of others, has revealed Hillary Clinton to be much higher in, the hierarchy than Bill, who, while of a crossbreed bloodline, is a pawn in the game, to be used and discarded as necessary. It is not always that the most powerful people are placed in what appears to be the most powerful jobs. Often they are not. They are the string-pullers of those who appear to have the power.

[QuietStorm]

22. Since many here seem so up for laughs and disinformation and alll

Why not go really off topic and try David Icke's letter to to GW BUSH just for laughs! Since so many seem so in the mood for jokes.

Open Letter to President GW Bush
2/2/2001
Dear President Bush,

As the Jewish son of a US veteran who fought in Nazi Germany during WWII I am deeply troubled by your links to the Third Reich, anti-Semitism and eugenics. References to these connections can be found in many books and newspaper articles and on thousands of websites on the internet.
I have personally done two years of research which have convinced me of the validity of these accusations involving three generations of your family. Among the prominent authors that link the Bush family directly to Nazi Germany is former US Justice Department Nazi War Crimes Prosecutor, John Loftus, now the President of the Florida Holocaust Museum.
While I did not vote for you and feel the outcome of the 2000 election has questionable legitimacy, I fully accept that you are now the President of the United States. Therefore, it is very important that you personally address these issues.

Since the election I have observed a concerted public effort on your part to "reach out" to groups such as African Americans and the disabled - the same groups your family targeted for elimination or sterilization in the past. I'd like to believe this represents a dramatic change of heart on your part rather than being a cynical public relations effort intended to make people forget your family history - or worse - a smoke screen for more horrors to come.
You frequently claim to be a man of faith, a born-again Christian. Both the old and new testaments you read from each day place great emphasis on repentance and forgiveness.

In that context it would seem appropriate that you respond to these allegations, either by denying or acknowledging them and if true, publicly apologize to the American people. That, rather than empty rhetoric and political posturing, could go a long way towards accomplishing the "healing" you seek.

For the purpose of clarity I will list and briefly summarize some details of the four main allegations in question and ask that you respond to each. References from books, newspapers and the websites of think tanks and foundations associated with you which support each allegation can be found on the website and in the texts noted at the end of this letter.

1. THE BUSH FAMILY FINANCED HITLER

Your grandfather Prescott Bush (whose picture now hangs in the oval office) and his father-in-law, George Herbert Walker (who you are named after) were managing directors, stock holders and board members of Brown Brothers Harriman, once the most important private banking house in America. In that capacity they personally directed a constellation of interlocking companies including the Hamburg-Amerika Shipping Line and the Union Banking Corporation. In 1942 a number of their companies were seized by the U.S. Alien Property Custodian under authority of the US Congress' Trading with the Enemy Act, which declared them to be fronts for the Nazis.

These companies functioned as a means of channeling hundreds of millions of dollars in cash and strategic war materials to Nazi Germany and to IG Farben, an oil, chemical and munitions cartel half-owned by John D Rockefellers' Standard Oil. This same IG Farben built and operated Auschwitz and forty other slave labor factory/death camps.

Unfortunately, this shameful corporate history did not end with the WWII era. Many of the corporations such as GM, Alcoa, Monsanto and the various oil companies represented so abundantly by your cabinet appointees were also enthusiastic supporters of Nazi Germany and in a number of instances were directly involved in IG Farbens' slave labor factories, the Holocaust and eugenics. The origin of your family fortune and extensive political and corporate connections can virtually all be directly traced to the Third Reich.

2. THE BUSH FAMILY ARE THREE GENERATIONS OF EUGENICISTS

While your public pronouncements have led many Americans to believe you are a principled opponent of abortion and a firm supporter of equal rights for minorities, the mentally ill and the disabled even a little research into your family background paints a very different picture. In close cooperation with the Rockefeller and Harriman families - a relationship that began with financing Hitler - your family has been at the forefront of the American eugenics movement for almost seventy years.

Your father and grandfather were both prominently involved in Planned Parenthood at a time when this was a very controversial organization. Known today as an advocate for a womens' right to choose, when your father and grandfather were involved this organization was at the forefront of a nationwide movement to sterilize minorities, the mentally ill and the disabled. Its' founder Margaret Sanger enthusiastically supported Hitlers' eugenics laws in the 1930's and sought to established them throughout the US. Both your father and grandfather spent many years trying to limit the population of third world nations which they saw as a threat to the dominance of the US. As a Congressman you father was nicknamed "rubbers" by his colleagues because of his obsession with limiting the birthrates of minorities.

Like you and many of your advisors, both your father and grandfather were associated with the Pioneer Fund, a private eugenics foundation in NYC founded by Wycliffe Draper. Draper and other Pioneer Fund members helped Hitler draft both Nazi Germany's racial laws and the US laws requiring mandatory court-ordered sterilization which at one time were on the books in 30 States. These were the very laws Hitlers' eugenics laws - which led to the Holocaust - were inspired by.

William H. Draper III, a relative of the Pioneer Fund's Wycliffe Draper and co-fundraising chairman for the 1980 Bush-for-President national campaign, has also been a leader of the world eugenics movement. His father, William H. Draper, Jr. was director of the German Credit and Investment Corp, a Nazi front company associated with your grandfather, Prescott Bush.
As UN Ambassador your father worked with both William H. Draper III and John D Rockefeller III to expand the activities of the Office of Population Control at the US Agency for International Development (USAID). Your father praised the lifelong eugenics efforts of both Rockefeller and Draper in an introduction he wrote to a 1973 book, World Population Crisis: The United States Response. Many researchers now believe the African AIDs epidemic was the result of one of the many covert population control techniques employed by USAID.

While chair of the Republican Task Force on Earth Resources and Population your father brought William Shockley, a noted race scientist, before the US Congress to testify in support of Shockleys' "Bonus Sterilization Plan" which proposed offering a cash incentive to African Americans, drug addicts and the disabled who would voluntarily be sterilized as a means of reducing welfare, social security benefits and crime.

3. COMPASSIONATE CONSERVATISM IS THE NEW EUGENICS
Most Americans know that while Governor of Texas you presided over more executions than any US governor or world leader, including the executions of women, the mentally ill and retarded prisoners. Simultaneously, under your watch Texas has had the worst record of legal assistance to accused prisoners of any State. Your "Guinness record" for executions is consistent with the eugenics-based efforts of both your father and grandfather.
Numerous members of your cabinet and staff have praised or are direct associates of Charles Murray, author of the Bell Curve, a classic text of eugenics which attempts to prove that African Americans are genetically inferior and thus have the lowest IQ's of any race. This bogus theory is then used by Murray as the justification for eliminating welfare, affirmative action, social service programs and for building more prisons - all of which are ideas you are closely associated with. Almost every reference in the Bell Curve about African Americans can be directly traced to the Pioneer Fund, a eugenics organization with long-standing ties to your family.

Among your appointees and advisors who share an organizational or personal association to the Bell Curve are Stephen Goldsmith, Tommy Thompson, Elaine Chou, Myron Magnet, Marvin Olasky, Linda Chavez, Karl Rove, Floyd Flake, Spencer Abraham and John Ashcroft. Even your minority advisors have a Bell Curve connection.

Your Health and Human Services Sec. Tommy Thompson, based his welfare reforms while Governor of Wisconsin on Murrays'' books and employed Murray as a consultant. Your chief domestic policy advisor, Stephen Goldsmith, credits Murray with creating the entire welfare reform movement in the US and recently introduced him as a great scholar at a welfare seminar at the Manhattan Institute. Myron Magnet, the man whose book you claim has influenced you second only to the bible, praises Murray in almost every article he writes.

Murrays'' racially-charged ideas are extensively quoted and lavishly praised on the websites of the Heritage Foundation, The Federalist Society and the Manhattan Institute - right wing think tanks closely identified with you and virtually all of your appointees. On some of these websites Murray is mentioned hundreds of times, always as a visionary and brilliant thinker. These foundations significantly contributed in numerous ways to your becoming President and even a number of the US Supreme Court Justices who ruled in your favor are members.

The Bell Curve was written at the Manhattan Institute, the very think tank that you have publicly acknowledged as the source of your policy ideas. Murray continues to give speeches there to this day alongside some of your closest advisors.

Manhattan Institute senior fellows, John J. DiIulio Jr. and Stephen Goldsmith, were just appointed by you to head up a multi-billion dollar "faith based initiative" intended to replace social services. Consistent with many facts addressed in this letter, the Manhattan Institute was founded by former CIA director, William Casey - a close associate of your father - who spent the years following WWII bringing hundreds of former Nazis involved in eugenics to the US.

4. YOU HOPE TO MAKE CHRISTIANITY THE DEFACTO "OFFICIAL" RELIGION OF THE US

You have made numerous public statements both as Governor of Texas and US President which imply that Christianity is the official religion of this nation, a viewpoint apparently shared by many of your staff, cabinet members and advisors. As governor you created an official Texas State holiday, Jesus Day. I am unable to find any reference to you creating a corresponding Moses Day, Buddha Day or Mohammed Day despite your state having many citizens of those faiths.

Unlike any other modern-day US President you have not appointed a single Jewish person to your diverse cabinet which uniquely has an Arab-American, a Chinese-American, a Japanese-American, an African-American and a Cuban-American. While campaigning for President you publicly stated your belief that only those who accept Christ can enter heaven, which implies that followers of other religions - specifically Judaism - are condemned to hell. This same statement has been used for centuries to justify anti-Semitism, forced conversions and genocide. At issue is not your beliefs but that you chose to highlight this while running for the nation's highest office, despite knowing it's historical use as a means of fomenting anti-Semitism.

During your father's 1988 Presidential campaign it was discovered by a Jewish newspaper that at least ten former Nazis, a number of them SS officials directly involved in carrying out the Holocaust, were working in high-level capacities within his campaign. Public pressure forced them to resign but later many resumed working with your father.

Your father is also known to be a close friend, long-time ally and business partner of the Saudi royal family, as is your Vice President, Dick Cheney. During WWII this corrupt, virulently anti-Semitic dynasty - which was set up as rulers in the 1920's by your father's Wall Street oil business partners - were among Hitler's most enthusiastic supporters.

Your so-called faith-based initiative "guru", Marvin Olasky, converted from Judaism to Christianity and actively seeks to convert other Jews as well. Unlike some participants in your faith-based initiative, Mr. Olasky is honest enough to admit that proselytizing will take place while social services are performed at taxpayer expense.
In light of these facts and your families decade long efforts to finance Nazi Germany it seems only fair to ask, are you an anti-Semite?

Mr. President, I understand that you have many important tasks to accomplish. Nevertheless, it seems essential that you respond to these questions in detail without further delay. If as you have repeatedly said, you are a, "uniter not a divider", then nothing could do more to resolve the lingering doubts millions of Americans have about you, your agenda, your cabinet appointees and your presidency than straightforward answers to these questions.
The American people would surely be comforted to find that all of these charges are untrue and that you are in fact the humble family man and born-again Christian your aides and the corporate media are so intent on portraying to us.

http://www.davidicke.net/newsroom/america/usa/020401a.html

[LARED]

24. At least Ickes is consistent

http://www.theseekerbooks.com/articles/Icke.htm

According to him, it didn’t much matter who won the 2000 American election since both Al Gore and George W. Bush are shape-shifters. Bush comes from a long line of reptilians, with his father a major Satanist and pedophile. Al Gore, we are told, likes to drink the blood of sacrificial victims. What a choice!


Do you think Ickes is got the goods on Gore as well?

Do you beleive all the extreme right wing tripe about the Gore/Nazi links as well?

[QuietStorm]

31. I am bored now with this thread

I haven't come across any gore/nazi links. I am done following the line of thought in this thread. I do tend to take more seriously the nazi lineage within the bush administration. I always have way back in1988 when it was printingin the NY times that bush sr DID have known nazi's on his campaign committee whom he moved to his NSC. That article was a small blurb printed in the NYtimes and can be cross referenced by Russ Belltrant's Old and New World Nazi Database.

On that note as I said there is a credibility problem here on this 9/11 forum and it reflects poorly on all here. Why? I find it interesting not one person here has made not one comment regarding the AAAR. Niether Eastman or Ickes wrote that. Now I am not interested in any comments from some key players here. A pack wolf I have never been, a lone wolf is more within my character.

[Abe Linkman]

33. C'mon, Luigi

Lighten up. Or should I say, "lively up yourself." Sometimes, the disinformation people are funny - whether they intend it or not.

They're just doing what they get paid for. Nice gig, huh? Unless they only work on a contract basis and thus have to wait for the next covert operation to happen. But, they are unlikely to suffer much of a financial hit because self-inflicted "tearattacks" seem to come along fairly regularly these days.

[QuietStorm]

35. lighten up huh

I am just surprised to see this has gone backwards rather than forward . and the same old same old is being hashed about. I suppose since this is the thread for outing people I shouldn't balk at guesses and stabs in the darkness regarding my identity either-eh? And who pretell might you be "oh come to cheer me up abe linkman"?

[Abe Linkman]

36. Luigi, you'll like it here. There's even disinfo agents here. Lots.

"guesses and stabs in the darkness regarding my identity"

Do you have any evidence that I "guessed or stabbed"? (that's a disinfo agent joke, so chill)

Luigi, give me a little more credit, already. I didn't guess or take a stab, and you have no basis for saying that, other than as a defense mechanism becuase the idea that someone could "out" you in such a casual way irritates someone who is high-strung and none too modest.

[QuietStorm]

43. Oh aren't you cute!

If you are so sure I am luigi than you would also be sure that I am not a disinfo agent. so we don't have to waste to much time on that. I was bitchy. This 9/11 place made me bitchy last night. I had mostly been participating upstairs in LBN and then accidently fell down into IP so I have been putting two cents there as well. I read through some of the threads here, but am still not sure it is worthwhile participating, but what went on here last night made me bitchy.

And in participating on forums sometimes it is just not wise to trust anyone.

[QuietStorm]

45. OH

it seems like MOST are disinformation people down here. not just LOTS. MOST. I burnt out before because of all the haggling about stuff I found to be OBVIOUS even before I got sucked into to sourcing and reading and flipping and cordite and c-130s and runaway 1-19 and the agents in the tower at RRNA and the strange fire in roslyn. UAV'S who is sending arms where when, collusions, allies, kissinger mofaz iran contra bennekee blah blah. What seems obvious to me isn't to all. The guardian for instance just picked up on the Mofaz plan it has been on the net for two years. Finally a journal picks it up. The analysis suggests it is the weakness in our US strategy in the ME. Oh really gee. two fucking years after the it surfaced. FINALLY one journal brings it to light.

And the fabrication of forensics and the lime green passenger seats.

I seemed clear to me. Many things seem clear to me that no one seems concerned with at all. I feel it is the same here. people are either all wrapped up in their piece of the puzzle or they are more concerned with messing up the pieces that seem already to be in place.

I get bitchy.

[QuietStorm]

46. And

can you do me a favor and stop calling me luigi.

[QuietStorm]

47. tell me

why in the world would you want to analyze me? and I am much more modest than some btw. I never pretended to be some big investigator. but don't cross me with insults then I start barking back. Modest. If I wasn't modest I'd I probably be dangerous. but I am just nobody. who takes on a different persona in the writing . I can be braver and say what I might not usually say in real life.

and who pray tell are you? I don't remember an abe linkman.

[QuietStorm]

21. Now that is David Ickes

who also wrote might I add an articulate letter to our illustrious dubya questioning him regarding his families lineage to the reich via prescott and his dad's ties to known nazi's which he shifted from his campaign committee to his NSC (which is can be substantiated). His letter also goes on to query Dubya regarding his families ties to the eugenics movement. While I do draw the line in the sand on the reptialian theory and shapeshifting that letter I wrote is okay by me.

[LARED]

25. A little History on Ike's

http://www.publiceye.org/Icke/IckeBackgrounder.htm

an excerpt;

At first this evolution seemed relatively harmless. Icke began to flirt seriously with New Age theories, and then began to act on them. He dressed in turquoise, and began to call himself the "son of godhead". But by the time his book "The Robot's Rebellion" was printed in 1994, his trajectory had begun to take quite a different course. In 1996, the British magazine "Left Green Perspectives" wrote that this book "indicated a convergence of New Age thinking with Nazi philosophy. Casting aside his pat concerns about the environment, Icke enthusiastically embraced the classic Nazi conspiracy theory, alleging that the world is controlled by a secret cadre of "The Elite." He openly endorsed The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the Tsarist anti-Semitic forgery that informed Hitler's notion of a global Jewish conspiracy."

The following year Icke brought out another book, "...and the truth shall set you free." This one, however, was self-published, as its content was so objectionable that his publisher refused to have it printed. And small wonder. The book repeated Icke's previous claims that the Protocols were true, and went on to state: "I strongly believe that a small Jewish clique which has contempt for the mass of Jewish people worked with non-Jews to create the First World War, the Russian Revolution, and the Second World War....They then dominated the Versailles Peace Conference and created the circumstances which made the Second World War inevitable. They financed Hitler to power in 1933 and made the funds available for his rearmament."2

In this book, Icke went even further. He began to flirt explicitly with Holocaust denial,(wow I'm surprized, /sarcasm) saying "why do we play a part in suppressing alternative information to the official line of the Second World War? How is it right that while this fierce suppression goes on, free copies of the Spielberg film, Schindler's List, are given to schools to indoctrinate children with the unchallenged version of events. And why do we, who say we oppose tyranny and demand freedom of speech, allow people to go to prison and be vilified, and magazines to be closed down on the spot, for suggesting another version of history." 3 He also denounced the Nuremberg Trials as "a farce" and "a calculated exercise in revenge and manipulation" 4

Icke's politics today are a mishmash of most of the dominant themes of contemporary neofascism, mixed in with a smattering of topics culled from the U.S. militia movement. He has written diatribes on the Illuminati, the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission as examples of secret plots to take over the world. He opposes gun control as a plot by this Elite, which has deliberately orchestrated numerous mass shootings to whip up opposition to guns. 5 He has repeatedly posted anti-abortion literature and articles on his web site. 6 He rails against conspiracies to implant microchips in everyone's bodies, coded with the Satanic number "666". 7 He even accuses the U.S. government of carrying out the Oklahoma City bombing and murdering 168 men, women and children. 8

For a decade Icke has exhibited signs of serious mental instability. In his web site autobiography he reveals that as early as 1990 he became aware of "a presence around me, like there was always someone in the room when there was not. It got to the point where I sat on the side of the bed in a hotel room in London in early 1990 and said to whoever or whatever: "If you are there will you please contact me because you are driving me up the wall." A year later, on holiday in Peru, Icke describes hearing voices: "as I looked at the mound, a voice in my head began to say: "Come to me, come to me, come to me.... Suddenly I felt my feet pulled to the ground again like a magnet, the same as in the newspaper shop, but this time far more powerful. My arms then shot above my head, with no decision by me for them to do so.... A flow of powerful energy began to go into the top of my head like a drill, and I could feel the flow going the other way up from the ground through my feet. It was then I heard the third voice in my head, something that has never happened since. It said very clearly: "It will be over when you feel the rain"." 9

Is this a guy you are willing to defend?

On a side note it is amazing how all these historical revisionists kooks wind up together.

[QuietStorm]

30. It is better we defend

the neo nazi undertones present within our current administration instead. I have noticed so many concerned with anti-Semitism do tend to defend these obvious undertones. I grant you Icke's reptilian theory's do scamper off the beaten path so far I haven't even read it. However he is not the first to imply what he does in regard to that "small Jewish clique". I have come across that line of thought more than once on Jewish anti-zionist sites as well. I tend to not persue that line of thought either. Like any unpoplar line of thought , that one is as contravercial as the Bush nazi lineage, which I find more so troubling and am puzzled how so many sweep it away as so irrelevant when indeed it to can be crossed referenced.

And that is how I judge information. Certainly the worthiness of sources are important, however sometimes in the strangest places one does come across viable information as well. While I really have not read much David Ickes, hardly any, I came across his letter to GWB before I tripped over his new age theories. I do not think I am defending him per se, but I will defend any information as viable IF it can be cross referenced over time and in some cases I will not discount those people that are so swiftly swiped at as nutcase gadflies. Sometimes all it takes to be labeled a nut case gadfly is to dissemination information that is contrary to the status quo. On occasion the status quo is guilty of deep levels of psychosis as well.

Which brings me to the case of Eastman. I find the shennanigans displayed within this thread much more offputting than Eastman's Hillary theory. Not that I follow his line there as certainly that one paragraphy that people here are spreading around is not enough information to do much of anything with and based on that paragraph I find it difficult to take serious. His Hillary theory, or what RH seems to describe as his jumping around in terms of his earlier speculation do not detract from the other speculation that I have have noted have merit IMHO. The shennanigans here have given me pause. Interestingly the have succeeded in discrediting you all, as well as the tenure of the *9/11 investigation* here in DU where this thread has succeeded in denigrating the credibility of all here. The is another 9/11 investigation site that beats this one by a long shot.

In other words, I find public humilation off putting and those most humiliating are as suspect as Dick Eastman.

[QuietStorm]

19. This 9/11 forum is a joke!

what is funny about it? not much. For all we know I might be he disinformation specialist based on the shenagans in here because I also mentioned the eastman two plane theory as a viable one and I am now pursuing his thoughts on the missile smoke tread, but I will make it really easy for all I am not a disinformation, a cia double agent, a mossad probe or a mafia wise guy, nor am I a freeper. Furthermore, at this time the 9/11 investigation on DU is by far if not the biggest joke I have encountered since my arrival here, it does not hold a candle to other 911 investigative site and at this time is much more like nationalampoonary.

[Dancing_Dave]

7. Who at APFN wrote THAT?

I hope it wasn't Dick Eastmen because he's the one at that site that's done the most worthwhile research. Though this piece is rather absurd, it doesn't sound like the author got his own joke!

I've noticed that even Dick is better at figuring out rather technical aspects of 9/11, than at figuring out the political and historical background. He's better on the question of WHAT really happened on 9/11, than on WHY it happened.

In figuring out some of the technical stuff, right wing sites do have one obvious advantage. They are more likely now to get some useful LEAKS from right wing or conservative people (usually technicians) in the present right wing government, who nevertheless are getting fed up with the hypocritical, unscrupulous, corrupt and often downright incompetent neo-cons at the top these days! And it's much safer for the careers of such alienated civil servants to annonymously leak something on a website they like, than it would be to go to a paper as whistle-blower!

To understand the historical and political backrgound of WHY 9/11 happened, I've found http://www.globalresearch.ca/ and http://copvcia.com much better than APFN. And of course, Ewing 2001 and the rest of the Global Free Press crew often do some good work on that stuff too.

Some Europeans seem to be doing a little better at putting the What Really Happened together with the historical and political Why it Happened:
If you can read French, by all means go to http://www.reseauvoltaire.net/ Their files on Donald Rumsfeld and 9/11 are quite an eye-opener, to say the least!

[RH]

8. Caveat Emptor.

Dick is better at figuring out rather technical aspects of 9/11?

;-)

You're joking, yes?

Last year he wanted to believe that the plane flew straight in at an angle of 90 degrees to the Pentagon wall when long since then everybody else had appreciated that it came in at angle over the overpass.

During that discussion he didn't even know his north from south.

I put together 'Spot the Lamp Poles' to prove him wrong when he'd abusively sworn blind that the notion of five fallen poles was a disinformation exercise.

He'd said "The pole 'evidence' is bogus -- not tied to the time of the crime."

He just spews out one load of garbage after another with never a qualm about it when shown to be wrong.

Then he wanted to believe that the plane came over Arlington Cemetery. His story changes from month to month. Now he has it coming over the Sheraton Hotel albeit that a vast majority of the eye witness were quite clear that it flew over Columbia Pike.

Stuff that doesn't suit his absurdity just gets to be brushed to one side; never seems to notice that his star witnesses all persistenly swear that they saw the B757 hit the building!

Then all of a sudden he wanted to have it that the pictures of first lamp pole were of two different poles, switched in broad daylight.

Then he agreed that the plane had scraped across the top of the electricity generator outside the Pentagon only then to belatedly switch to another story when a few dimensional objections eventually dawned upon him.

How can anybody take his sort of clowning seriously?

:puke:

[QuietStorm]

17. well if you are who I think you are

that performance I witnessed followed the official line of bunk to a tee, including pat official arguement and was not all that enchanting either. Of course I am not sure you are the same poster. which is why I call it that performance rather than make my comments personal to you. But interesting you have the same initials as the poster to whom I refer.

[dick_eastman]

14. Eastman never made Hillary 911 claim -- I'm here to show Pentagon evidence

boloboffin introduces this topic to DU -- accusing unnamed persons of saying that the are arguing that Hillary CLinton planned the September 11 mass-murders.

However the text he presents here does not make that claim. That rumor was planted here by "Jack Riddler" in the 9-11 Joke thread, in his reply to me (Dick Eastman).

I've reread the passage boloboffin provides below and I find no factual errors about events named or their timing.

I do not see why he has initiated a thread on this topic, based on Jack Riddles statement that has already been corrected on the other thread.

The writer quoted below has made over ten thousand posts to newsgroups and e-lists -- is this one speciman representative of his thinking and his subject matter? or is it selected merely because it was the most controversial and confusing that you could find among all that material.

Boloboffin asks, "Is this the kind of thinking we like to encourage at the Democratic Underground?"

Obviously the answer is yes, insofar as you and Jack have introduced it here unnecessarily.

A new discussant has appeared with specific photographs and witness attention that he wants DU discussants to examin and comment on. Boloboffin, Ron Harvey (RH) and Jack "Riddler" have responded with personal attack and falsehoods (the claim by boloboffin and riddler that the newcomer claims that Hillary Clinton planned 9-11 -- an effort to falsely paint him as ridiculous so that discussants will be turned off from looking at the pictures, looking at what he points out in the security video pictures, and the witness testimony that locates the Boeing on a path incompatible with the physical damage (downed poles and the wall damage) etc. --

So let us not talk about Hillary Clinton when the topic is the Pentagon attack evidence and what it does and does not establish about the nature of the Sept 11 attack. (Or start another thread on this topic IF YOU INSIST -- and lay out all the evidence there is on the subject and discuss it dispassionately -- if I can find the time I may contribute to it myself.)

Meanwhile -- if someone presents you with photos of the Pentagon attack and says that certain things are in those photos that instantly discredit the official story of a Boeing crash at the Pentagon -- why do you change the subject and dredge up that someone's opinons of events back in the days of the O.J. Simpson case and the Whitewater investigation.

I propose that people who come here to present evidence and critique official positions of the Bush administration, have their arguments evaluated on their merits -- not by an inquisiton that will label the discussant a "liberal" or "someone who has defended O.J. Simpsons innocence or shared his suspicions that organized crime motivated by high politics may have been behind the killings -- all that is a different story -- a different debate -- a debate that all agree is not now the best use of our time.

So let us repair to the thread that discusses the September 11, 2001 attack on the Pentagon and discuss the evidence that I know has not been systematically presented on any DU forum.

Those DU readers who have been looking at the evidence presented -- and are still busy doing that -- are the people I am waiting to hear from. I very much want Ron Harvey, boloboffin, and Jack "Riddler" to give their interpretations of what is in these photos -- and let us do it fresh for the benefit of DU discussants to whom this evidence will be new.

It would be best for the quality of the discussion if past altercations be forgotten -- and respect for the evidence and the "jury" be paramount.

I will resume discussion of the Pentagon attack on the 9-11 thread.

Dick Eastman
Yakima, Washington


-------------


A major 9/11 website, cited often in debates here at DU, has this to say about many interesting events in the past few years:

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/not_crashed.htm

We now know Flight 77 was not crashed into the Pentagon.

An F-16 flew over the Boeing 757 for a while, and then the airliner was diverted with transponder off, flown by remote control to either crash site or a landing site known only to the 911 perpetrators. Passengers and crew may be alive or may have been alive as captives some days following September 11.

I know this is far-fetched. I know this is not what the families of the victims need to hear right now. But there is a possibility that kidnap victims are being held somewhere and my responsibility is to them if they exist (and I think they may.)

When I leered that Hillary Clinton's severest biographer critic, Barbara Olsen was on Flight 77 it became important to learn what business put her on Flight 77 to Los Angeles on September 11. From now on the passengers of flight 77 must be considered possible kidnap victims. The amorality and arrogance of the criminal elites responsible for the 911 frame-up make this a reasonable suspicion and avenue of investigation. But another theory that must be also be tested against the facts involves a willing cell-phone actress. Intelligent internet discussants of every political stripe are concluding that Flight 77 was not destroyed at the Pentagon. We must determine where the abductors took that plane.

I have long been convinced that Hillary Clinton was behind the Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman murders that created the distraction the night before the very day Hillary became the first First Lady to testify in a criminal investigation. I also know that she was involved in serious economic crime when she received criminal payment for corrupt services in the form of a million-to-one (i.e. impossible to come by honestly) illegally manipulated first-timer bonanza killing in the commodities futures speculation. Also, that she had one of the Secret Service men she detested, a man who might have heard too much, transferred to Okalahoma city -- to perish in the bombing of the Murrah Federal Building there, even as the drug-trade-dealing BATF chose to be away from the office that day. And there is the Vince Foster murder. If Mrs. Olsen is in the hands of Hillary Clinton and her associates now, I am sure she would much rather be in the Atlantic trench.

Ever wonder about all the unaccounted-for time that Bill Clinton (that closet Bush man and cfr stooge and hit man) spent in Harlem, New York prior to September 11.

It's time for the many who know about these crimes to come forward -- but come forward to the internet first -- it is the people, not the criminals who need to hear your story.

===========

Is this the kind of thinking we like to encourage at the Democratic Underground?

[QuietStorm]

16. okay what is going on?

I could give a rats ass about this email whether eastman wrote it or not it does not discredit all the other stuff I have read and might I add I found Acerbic in the pentagon 2 thread very rude. I never even entered this thread till now because the hillary clinton kidnap theory which I encountered well before this thread was a little too X-filish and there was so much other information at the time that was more plausible than this theory. Stuff regarding the crash not where did the boeing go.

You know 9/11 and much of the unraveling one has to do to decipher truth from spin is already enough of a mindfuck (pardon the language) without practical jokes of this nature.

I have one question for you? was there any investigtion regarding the claim in the AAAR about an initial crash on runway 1-19. I checked and finally found that there is in fact a runway 1-19 at RRNA and as I have stated before here there was another odd article regarding captain defina in which this report of this initial crash was written. I need be I will find the articles. I know where they are. but I will wait for your response as to how you might explain this initial report of this crash at RRNA. Becuase I have been screaming about a long time now and no one seems to have addressed the question yet, but to suggest it was a typographic error in a report that went through a three tier evaluation process before it was released, and might I add did not include Alan Wallace's eye witness account of what he saw at ground zero.

I find this to be strange considering the AAAR was an official report with damage assessments that does intend to back up the official story that flight 77 hit the pentagon. So it would seem to me that if it did Alan Wallace's account being right there at ground zero would certainly have done the trick,, but they left his account out for some reason and just went with Captain McCoy's sighting form crystal city and Captain Gilroys call in form the crash site. The captain on Wallace's team.

I guess one could argue they had Gilroy's sighting they did not need Wallace's as well, but they included every thing about Wallace's account but his description of the plane which varied from one Wallace account to the other. Skipper his partner never made any public statements that I am aware of and Gilroy I am not sure was interviewed as off as Alan Wallace. Yet it was Gilroy's call that was in the AAAR and not Wallace's eyewitness acount.

However another oddity was that 9 units were dispatched to another fire in roslyn just at the time the plane descended so none of these units actually saw the plane but the account is included I feel to explain why all the units arrive on site so quickly. The report does is also very vague about that roslyn fire as one of the units did call out upon arrive that the fire had been put out so within two minutes one unit arrived at the roslyn site and put the fire out and immediately called out to the other 8 units rushing to this fire that they fire was out???? How is this possible???? I never made a big deal about the AAAR because no one seemed to think it very significant but me and who am I ... nobody... but many things from that report come to mind till this day.

I am fried now with this fucking hillary email and acerbics rude comment in the other thread that does me for tonight. Please I would be interested to have this addressed. I presented it in another thread and although I got a PM about how interesting it was no comment was made on forum.

What! is everyone here in the 9/11 investigation full of shit or PR plants, because this kind of bullshit is really off putting, but I must say casts a dark light on those that have gone out of their way to make eastman look foolish than on eastman himself. I am fried I am not proof reading. I suppose that means that someone will now post to me and correct my spelling... fine I really don't care because whatever this is with the HIllary clinton stuff and this thread and Acerbics rudeness so much bullshit that fine if I am discredited for spelling or typo's so be it.

I must add that this whole display just lowered the credibility almost to nil on the worth of persuing any 9/11 investigation here. There are other 9/11 investigation sites that are much better.

[acerbic]

18. Furious, total denial of every bit of reality seems to be going on...

...like desperately ignoring Dickhead Yeastman's fanatically freepy kookery and only whining that pointing out Dickhead Yeastman's fanatically freepy kookery is "rude". :crazy:

[QuietStorm]

23. and yet you have completely ignored all comments

regarding the AAAR. And I am suppose to take you seriously:crazy:

I addressed your yuckhead post in the other thread.

[Bolo Boffin]

28. Get your facts straight, Dick.

One, I started this thread BEFORE your exchange with Riddler about Hillary. Check the time stamp available on every thread.

Two, there is no other way to understand these paragraphs that you admit came from your own hand than to conclude you believe Hillary was behind or involved in the planning of the 9/11 attacks:

When I leered that Hillary Clinton's severest biographer critic, Barbara Olsen was on Flight 77 it became important to learn what business put her on Flight 77 to Los Angeles on September 11. From now on the passengers of flight 77 must be considered possible kidnap victims. The amorality and arrogance of the criminal elites responsible for the 911 frame-up make this a reasonable suspicion and avenue of investigation. But another theory that must be also be tested against the facts involves a willing cell-phone actress. Intelligent internet discussants of every political stripe are concluding that Flight 77 was not destroyed at the Pentagon. We must determine where the abductors took that plane.

I have long been convinced that Hillary Clinton was behind the Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman murders that created the distraction the night before the very day Hillary became the first First Lady to testify in a criminal investigation. I also know that she was involved in serious economic crime when she received criminal payment for corrupt services in the form of a million-to-one (i.e. impossible to come by honestly) illegally manipulated first-timer bonanza killing in the commodities futures speculation. Also, that she had one of the Secret Service men she detested, a man who might have heard too much, transferred to Okalahoma city -- to perish in the bombing of the Murrah Federal Building there, even as the drug-trade-dealing BATF chose to be away from the office that day. And there is the Vince Foster murder. If Mrs. Olsen is in the hands of Hillary Clinton and her associates now, I am sure she would much rather be in the Atlantic trench.

It was the telltale detail of Barbara Olson's death that alerted you to the possibility of Hillary's involvement, wasn't it? After all, she was "behind" the OJ murders, and she had that Secret Service agent killed at the Murrah Building, implying she had knowledge of that event before it happened, and then there's Vince Foster...Of course you believe Hillary was involved in the planning of 9/11!

Your backstroke needs a lot of work, fellow.