I had a tinfoil moment last night which might explain the Iraq mess.

[The Backlash Cometh]

Okay, maybe it was a nightmare, but this is how I’m fitting in the new data that came out in the last week or so:

First, we lay the foundation: Foremost is the PNAC crowd's desire to control oil in the Middle East, because he who controls the spice, controls the world, so to speak. Next is the fact that Rumsfeld and Cheney have been running the show for the last six years and they have been following the neo-con playbook and using their influence to control information coming from the CIA, State Department and the Pentagon, while Rove and Scooter have been working the presses.

Then we have 9/11, and I won’t go into the heavily discussed suspicious way that terrorists commandeered commercial planes that struck the WTC (among other targets) without our jet fighters even being in position to challenge them.

The new tinfoil began to crinkle with the British news video of the WTC 7 building collapse which implies that someone knew that the building was going down before it did. To my knowledge, it takes quite an ordeal to set up a planned demolition, which means that if this was planned, someone had already put the charges in place and wanted the building to look like it collapsed when the other two towers fell. After that, the surviving family members of the people who died at the WTC, received unprecedented amount of money as a settlement. For anyone who knows how the court system works, this was hush money, intended to keep the bereaved from asking too many questions. It accomplished what it intended to accomplish. It gave Bush a second term. (All IMHO.)

The second piece of tinfoil occurs when someone this week reported that Haliburton had been building three new bases in Iraq and from there, we can launch attacks in the Middle East.

This is where I woke up with the tinfoil moment. I pieced the two together and I asked myself, who is going to control those bases after America leaves Iraq? In this day and age of multi-corporate alliances and privatizing of governments, after Iran and Syria are hit, does it really matter who steps in? The hard work is done. And has our country been used to set up those bases to be manned by a privatized army, bought by one of the oil corporations?

That may have been the plan. (At least it actually sounds like a plan compared to the shit hovel we got.) But the reality is that it would have been a flawed plan, because even if oil tycoons used our boys to remove Saddam and set up those oil pipelines, they would still need a perpetual army to keep the pipelines safe and flowing. Something which I personally believe is impossible to do. Even mercenaries would grow tired of the constant bloodshed.

Anyway, what do you think? Should I avoid eating spicy food before retiring for the evening?

[radfringe]

1. comment on the 9/11 MIHOP

I was in the LIHOP corner for awhile, and then with the info regarding the way the buildings collapsed sort of got me nudged into the MIHOP corner

now I'm somewhere between...

Looking at how badly bushies have screwed up in Iraq, the whole Plame Leak case, etc. - a question occured to me - Were/are the bushies competent enough to develop and execute a plan (such as 9-11) successfully, and competently squash any evidence which may "leak"?

[seemslikeadream]

3. I don't think the "bushies" really knew

the whole 9/11 plan

[Virginia Dare]

9. I know I read somewhere here..

it was actually an old plan of Poppy's that was shelved, but dusted off for the neocon's purposes.

[The Backlash Cometh]

11. How much of it took into account present day situations?

Like, let's say, the internet? If they had done this twenty years ago, I think they might have gotten away with it completely. And those detention centers that Haliburton is building, would have been filled with liberal elite media. Twenty years ago, the media still had integrity, so there might have been some principled journalists who might have been an obstacle. Who knew it would be cheaper to buy them off, rather than to incarcerate them?

[bagrman]

50. The major flaw in the Liberals march towards truth, is the internet.

Once it's shut off we're all in the dark, there's no back up system.

[The Backlash Cometh]

53. Gore better come up with solar powered computer systems, is all I

have to say, since he who controls the spice, controls electricity. And he who controls electricity, controls the internets.

[The Backlash Cometh]

5. Arrogance, arrogance and more arrogance.

I think anyone who has lived among the good ole boys for a long time, know how this work. They know all the important people from the country club and they know how to do damage control, and how to silence dissenters. Now magnify it.

You take people who know their way around the CIA, the Pentagon and the State Department; you take people who know how to manipulate the media; you take people who know how to stir the prejudices of Americans to keep them divided; you take people who have contacts in other nations who can make sure that every dark suspect steps on their marks properly, and I think we have the beginning of a huge Psy-oped plan materialize. All of it is being propelled by arrogance.

And quite frankly, if it all turns out to be true, they did get pretty damn far, don't you think?

[rman]

14. How certain is it that the Bushies developed and executed the plan?

Involved at a high level, not doubt. Formulated the goal and the general strategy, most likely.
But i doubt they bothered with the details of the planning, and depending on what you mean by "executing" the plan, i particularly doubt they did in fact do that; usually people are hired for that.

[mikelewis]

37. 9/11 was far from competent...

There were all sorts of blunders made during that operation...

These are just a minor few...

1) The Pentagon took too long to collapse and there was ineffective media control because several pictures remain in the public market that show the small hole and lack of plane debris. Had the building collapsed quicker, they could have continued with the claim that the building covered the plane wreckage in stead of making up a story that it disintegrated on contact. Even though the "evil-doers" managed to immediately seize all the available videos (within 5 minutes of the attack), they failed to clamp down on the idea that these "tapes" existed which has stirred up even more controversy.

2) A lack of a back up plan led to our slip showing in World Trade Center 7. The "un-hijacking" and subsequent shoot-down of flight 93 created a very real problem for WTC 7 since the Operation was now lacking a plane to slam into the building. Even though the principles decided to just to go ahead with the planned demolition and hide it under a veil of shock and awe, it still created quite a pickle for Bush and his buddies.

3) Leaving Bush in that chair on camera...

4) Allowing Rumsfeld to be seen and photographed on the lawn after the attack...

... the list goes on and on... 9/11 was a cluster-fuck but it was such a scary cluster-fuck that most people didn't notice the glaring problems with the story until later. It's because these guys are incompetent that 36% of America now believe it was our Government and not Osama Bin Forgotten that perpetrated the attacks. If they were competent, they wouldn't have made such idiotic mistakes and wouldn't have to resort such ridiculous cover stories that helps drive even more people to question.

[glitch]

42. If it were truly competent no one would suspect a different explanation.

We all see how well that's working out.

Edit to add: I read somewhere that Bush had to sit in that classroom longer because one of the flights was 20 minutes late taking off.

[Arugula Latte]

44. mikelewis --

What you think happened to the plane that supposedly hit the Pentagon?

[mikelewis]

51. I never claimed there was a plane... That was someone else's theory...

Show me a plane and then we'll have something to talk about... The Government says there is a plane though I have never seen it nor any of the passengers. All I have seen is pictures of the Pentagon with a smoking hole in the side that was too small to fit what the Government said was in it. They said it was a giant airliner that hit it... fine... where is it? There is not one shred of definitive proof that a plane caused that damage, so why must I assume there is even a plane involved in the Pentagon equation?

[Arugula Latte]

54. I'm not being critical. I just don't know enough about this.

Were there families of people who were supposedly on the plane who have come forward to talk about the so-called passengers, though? If there were a group of people who disappeared, that would be somewhat obvious.

I think LIHOP and MIHOP are both possibilities, BTW.

[mikelewis]

76. Didn't mean to be snarky...

The point is... we don't know... no one "knows" and that is the biggest problem with 9/11. Because of 9/11, our country has forever changed in ways we will never comprehend... our civil liberties... two wars... international aggression... these are just the visible casualties of what happened on that day. As time progresses, it is becoming very clear that we do not have our facts as straight as we once believed. Like the reasoning behind Iraq, the story of 9/11 is unraveling faster than they can patch up the holes... but without a real investigation with subpoena power... all we are left with is questions with no hope of real answers.

[bagrman]

56. Crossing the Rubicon , quotes many people that...

Were ushered out of a Tennessee airport while a jet was landed and taxied over to a NASA building. The official time line notes that that jet was lost from radar before it reappeared and headed to the Pentagon. The hole in the pentagon was to small to fit a jet into, there was no debris, Officially the jet was destroyed by the fire but the people were identified by their finger prints.

[The Backlash Cometh]

47. Okay, I'm going to ask the mystery question:

What was so important about WTC 7, that they would want it to go down?

[bagrman]

57. On one of the floors was a CIA command center that was built like a fortress.

And since the flight school flunkies probably couldn't find NY without the help of airtraffic control, it is thought that the jets were polited by remote control, easy way to distroy the evidence.

[bagrman]

58. Here's WTC going down, notice that the penthouse starts down first.

http://911blogger.com/node/6054

[The Backlash Cometh]

63. Looks like the rug was pulled from under it.

Are there old subway tunnels under the WTC 7 which would have allowed someone to put charges under the foundation without anyone from the CIA command center inside the building knowing about it?

[magellan]

62. Also the SEC had offices with many documents stored there

...including most of what happened with ENRON. That's why they're having such a hard time bringing people to justice in that scam -- most of the evidence was lost with WTC 7.

[The Backlash Cometh]

66. Hmm...

It is all tied into Energy. Didn't someone report somewhere that Enron was funneling money, laundering money? Overcharging the Democratic states with intentions to do what with the money?

[mikelewis]

74. Don't know... but clearly, that building was brought down...

...the question of "why" should really be left up to a grand jury. I could make guesses all day long but that isn't going to help the situation at all...

All I know is that this buildings collapse doesn't appear natural nor does the surprising nature of the collapse explain how reporters could have known before it fell that it was coming down.

[John Q. Citizen]

59. All the same crowd who ran a major arms for profit for arms for coke for profit

for arms for profit called Iran Contra, a secret shadow extra-governmental/private power base, were in place on 9/11. All those Iran/Contra spooks were there.

bush himself is rather ordinary, and not likely the master-mind behind the grooming and protecting of those that became the future accused hijackers and their allies.

That evidence has leaked is not in question. However, the fact that evidence has leaked still hasn't inspired an exaustive and
independent with-subpeona-powers investigation into the whole events leading up to, on the day of, and after 9/11.

The bushies were perfectly capable of coming up with a plan to make sure no investigation took place. What more do they need to do?

[Virginia Dare]

2. I don't think it takes too much tinfoil...

to figure out that it's all about the oil.

Regarding 9/11, it accomplished one thing, and that was to give the U.S. good reason to occupy the Middle East in force.

Another piece of the puzzle is that just after 9/11 the U.S., capitulating to Saudi demands, largely abandoned their military presence there, and shifted it to Iraq.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2004/040323-enduring-bases.htm

[The Backlash Cometh]

6. Yes, I thought about this strategic move of the bases.

Because, Saudi Arabia can pay off any number of puppets to man those bases and still have the plausible deniability that won't upset their own people.

What I'm saying is, that I don't think the neo-cons did this to become independent of S.A.

[Virginia Dare]

7. Totally agree...

they are in cahoots. It's obvious to me who was behind 9/11. Those that had the most to gain from it.

[wakeme2008]

4. You gotta remember PNAC has two goals OIL and Israel....

So what countries man those bases in Syria may also be asked.....

[Dhalgren]

8. No, Back, I think you are on to something.

There has got to be a reason for all of this...apparent chaos. I no more believe that Bush wanted to "avenge his dad" nor any of that cover crap than I believe the man-in-the-moon. This was a planned, and executed strategy that the neo-cons think of as a success. So how can anyone look at this debacle and think "success"? And if this wasn't something more than we see, why is it so hard for anyone to stand up against it? We should have Democrats in congress shutting this government down, but they are wringing their hands and hoping for the best. But what is that "best"? And if, as the leaked memos from the Pentagon say, the US is planning to pull out of Iraq just before the change in government in January '09, what of those mega-bases that cost literally billions of dollars? Someone is going to use them. Corporate "security forces"? Why not...

[Aviation Pro]

10. One of the most disturbing aspects of the privatized armies....

...that are now performing combat duty in Iraq is that a lot of contract fighters are not former U.S. Special Forces, SEALS, et. al., but foreign nationals who signed up for mercenary duty. Thus, I've heard unsubtantiated reports that ex-Soviet Spetsnaz, former British SAS, ex-Israeli commandos and former members of South Africa's Recces are being gainfully employed by the privatized firms.

Maybe the Bush administration is trying to form another Foreign Legion to protect corporate interests.

[glitch]

46. Anybody can join New World Order, Inc.

Just have to check your soul at the door, no big.

[madokie]

12. Just pass that spicy food around some more

If there's one thing we need its connecting the dots. When this war is ended it will be because of America's Average Joe's not the congresscritters, they don't seem to have the stomach for it

[havocmom]

13. In a world without nations/borders but huge corporations

only corporations will have armies.

Your tinfoil delivery must have been delayed ;) Lots of us saw it all coming before US boots hit Iraqi soil.

Bin Laden wanted US military OUT of Arabia. bushco had to put them somewhere. Bin Laden wanted Saddam OUT of Iraq. Problem solved. bush/cheney does what Bin Laden wants, over and over again. Now bush/cheney are assuring plenty of recruits for Bin Laden's side.

We have always been at war with Oceania. bush/cheney want to make sure it stays that way.

[Virginia Dare]

20. I believe that Bin Laden is just the symbolic leader..

of the group that you speak of. He's not calling the shots, he merely makes a convenient enemy for one side and a powerful figure of leadership for the other. He's really a mythical creature at this point.

[havocmom]

23. I agree with you. He is the Boogey Man.

But his family is real enough and they sure get kid-glove handling from bushco. Remember back in the day of NO FLY following 9-11-01? SOMEBODY flew. Who was that? Oh, yeah, bush/cheney's employers' family members.

[Virginia Dare]

26. Yes, there was a Du'er who allegedly witnessed that..

I recall that the poster claimed they were working at Dulles airport that night and witnessed very heavy cases, which that person assumed at the time were full of cash being loaded onto jets, along with people who looked Middle Eastern. They posted this information on the 9/11 forum.

[Carni]

64. Members of the Bin Laden Family flown out of Boston

The son of the Saudi Defense minister and a friend were also flown out of Florida on 9-13.

Google secret saudi flight 9-13.

[eridani]

93. He's the chair of the alumni fundraising committee--

--not the quarterback.

[jollyreaper2112]

15. MIHOP is impossible

Just look at the record of the Bushies here. Are they evil? No fucking doubt, man. They're evil as Satan's poo. But are they good at it? No. The phrase "Mayberry Machiavellis" captures it perfectly. If you had a proper militaristic asshole in charge of things like a Caesar or Napoleon, Iraq would be a done deal and Iran would be halfway in the bag. Just think of the quote from Babylon 5 concerning humans: "Arrogance and stupidity all in one package, how efficient."

Consider how much these people wanted Iraq. They wanted it to go right more than they wanted Christmas and they're still screwing it up. And you're telling me they could pull of a 9-11 MIHOP without a single screwup? That'd make the Kennedy Assassination look like a Boy Scout merit badge project.

I'm in the LIHOP camp. That makes a lot more sense. My thinking is they selectively rolled back protection thinking they were going to get a decent pretext for war, maybe some hijackings, maybe a few dead passengers they could blame on Iraq, something exploitable but containable. Remember the reports that Atta was supposed to be a CIA double-agent but it appears he was actually a triple agent, really working for Al Queada even when they thought he was pretending to work for them while working for the CIA? I bet they thought they had this all sewn up and it exploded bigtime. We know that the CIA and other intel agencies knew about the possibility of using airliners as weapons but the Bushies seem about as ingorant of such matters as the average citzen so it probably took them as much by surprise as the rest of us. Nobody had ever tried it before!

LIHOP just makes so much more sense than MIHOP. For a LIHOP, all you have to do is just let someone else succeed without stopping them. There's no funding, no coordination, no ties between you and them. As far as anyone else is concerned, it looks like the CIA and FBI fucked up. Remember how Yitzak(sp?) Rabin was killed? Lone jewish student gunman just walks in and blows him away. What, right under Mossad's nose? BWAHAHA!!! If it was that easy there wouldn't be any Jewish politicos left on the face of the planet, the Palestinians would have killed them all! I don't have any proof, of course, but it seems obvious they just let the gunman through the security. The gunman probably didn't even know Mossad was cooperating with him.

So back to the original point: MIHOP makes your whole theory seem ridiculous. The Bushies are plenty evil enough to warrant execution for treason without bringing fantasy into it. Planting evidence on the guilty is how OJ got off.

[The Backlash Cometh]

16. Everybody had a role to play.

I don't think the Bushes are the ultimate masterminds. I think they're just playing a very high profile role.

And I think there's been a lot of damage control taking place in the last six-seven years. And everytime things are about to take a turn for the worse, one person keeps popping up: Jim Baker. So, you look at where Jim Baker has exposed himself, and there is where they were/are the most vulnerable.

[Virginia Dare]

21. Yes, Jim Baker seems to be rather busy of late...

running around cleaning up all sorts of messes, seems he just can't sweep the dirt under the rug fast enough. The burning question is, exactly whose tool is Jim Baker? Who does he ultimately answer to?

[Carni]

67. Doug baker --son of James

Was also at one time involved with the funds to rebuild Iraq.

I don't recall what dept he was an appointee of but emailed Craig Unger (house of bush house of saud) about the topic and he was unaware that there was a Doug baker involved.

I believe the last time I tried to google Doug Baker that all the supporting links about him had been buried but he was most definitely the son of James III--maybe someone else can come up with something.

[glitch]

48. Very good point about Jim Baker popping up wherever they are vulnerable. nt

[seemslikeadream]

17. Well someone MIHOP

cause it HAPPENED and someone else LIHOP.

[nashville_brook]

85. that's actually a very good point

never thought of it that way.

[bagrman]

71. Besides hijacking the planes what part of the opperation could Atta

and his bunch have pulled off with out help from some where within the government. The phyics of the towers falling is not possible, you can expend energy once, you either use that force to pancake the floors one on top of the other or you turn the conrete to dust. Not both.

[TwilightGardener]

18. What I don't understand

Is if the American people are starting to wake up to the fact that our wars are the result of the neocon plan for oil/dominance, why haven't the Dems in Congress directly addressed this? Why are they still engaging in silly arguments about troop surges and patriotism and various strategies, when the whole thing was planned from the get-go for made-up reasons (I don't know about 9/11, but democracy/WMD/Terror/Osama BL--all hoaxes). Why doesn't Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, SOMEBODY stand in Front of the American people and say, "Your Government lied to you, and has been lying for years"? Is it because they would implicate themselves? Because they don't want to start riots? There are still many people on the GOPer side who truly believe we are fighting terror and spreading freedom. At what point does the truth come out to the American people, so that we can stop the R's from getting into the WH again in '08?

[seemslikeadream]

19. Why didn't the democratics do something about Iran-Contra?

[Virginia Dare]

25. Because ultimately our elected officials have been bought

and paid for.

Yes, there are fundamental differences between the parties and I firmly believe that we are by far much better off with the Democrats in power, but when it comes right down to it, they're all just tools of the corporate ruling elite.

Look what they've done to Cynthia McKinney, who as of right now is the only one that's been brave enough to speak these words, or bring up these questions.

They're up against an extremely powerful force.

[bagrman]

73. Or threatened with their lives or those of their families. It's cheaper.

[wildbilln864]

78. I also believe there is ....

blackmail involved in keeping the secrets.
Here's one link but there are more. Some about bugged furniture. :shrug:
Link

snip/
"Which brings us to another key sentence in the Silverstein piece:
Apparently photographs were taken, and investigators are anxiously procuring copies. My heart beats faster in fevered anticipation.
As I said previously, we can presume that the congressmen were not dumb enough to take photos of themselves partying with working girls. Which means that the photos were taken without their permission.

Which means that -- in all likelihood -- we are dealing with a sting operation. A blackmail ring."

[Virginia Dare]

81. I agree, blackmail probably plays a big role in all of it...n/t

[wildbilln864]

82. another interesting cannonfire article...

here.

:hi:

[Virginia Dare]

83. Interesting wildbill...

I have a friend who works in government contracting. She doesn't work for the DOD, but because the DOD doesn't have near the people they need to handle all of the contracts going out, the agency that she works for contracts their contracting officers out to the DOD and charges them overhead for it.:wtf:

I asked her what they do with the "overhead", she was kind of vague, but then she said "oh, we have really nice furniture".

She also said she makes damn sure she doesn't do anything illegal but that she knows many of her colleagues could go to jail if they ever got audited. With Waxman in charge now, some people have got to be sweating bullets.

The corruption in this administration runs so deep, the crimes committed are so numerous, it just boggles the mind.

[glitch]

49. Think about this: if you suspect your opponent of allowing 9/11, what else might they do?

After Katrina you're going to tread very carefully indeed or you might lose another city to attack or natural disaster made far worse by their so-called "incompetence".

Welcome to DU!

[The Backlash Cometh]

52. Katrina was Bush's Waterloo.

No pun intended. It wasn't a complete defeat, but Bush lost his teflon that week. It's as if God said, "Hey, you think you're bad? I'll show you bad."

Now, what they're doing in the rebuilding effort is mean-spirited. Particularly if they plan to displace the poor and build high real-estate.

[glitch]

60. Yeah, Bush lost public opinion (which he doesn't care about) and gained lots of $$

for his chronies (which he may care about, at least he may want their approval).
But Americans who really care about American cities lost New Orleans. If somehow, a concerned American citizen is elected to Congress how are they going to deal with an opponent who wastes (or allows to waste) a whole American city for chrony profit?

My guess is either very deep denial or awareness with very careful alliances and actions.

Of course I am only talking about Americans who really care about America, not those in it for the corruption. We already know how they're dealing with their "opponents".

(you think you've got tin, come to glitch)

[Virginia Dare]

61. The press played a big role in exposing Katrina..

it was truly an emporer has no clothes moment for him, the big question is why did they punk Bush on Katrina but continue to cover him on just about every thing else? :shrug:

[The Backlash Cometh]

69. Because the number one reason to numb journalist didn't exist with

Katrina. Before Katrina, Rove, Cheney and Libby could pick up a phone and scare the hell out of editors by saying that there was a national security reason to stay mum. But Katrina was a natural disaster and the Bush Administration never anticipated it. And by the time they decided to take action, it was already too late. What's worse, Rove tried to turn it into a photo opportunity by making sure that Bush rode in with the cavalry. But they failed because they underestimated the sense of urgency.

[formercia]

79. The boys control a lot of people on the Democratic side too

it may not be that they have any knowledge of the plot but they have been co-opted by other means.

J Edgar Hoover was one of the boys. He had files on everybody that was anybody. If someone gave him trouble, he just sent someone over to their office with a copy of their file and let them read it. End of problem.

Supposedly his files were destroyed after he died, but I don't believe it for a minute, in fact a lot more files have probably been added since.

[MN ChimpH8R]

92. People who speak up powerfully against the Bush/Cheney Crime Family

tend to have their planes drop out of the sky or get suicided. The BCCF has extremely long tentacles and the scruples of a hyena jacked up on meth.

[stillcool]

22. I'm thinking that whatever the hot...

commodity of the day is, brings with it the uglier side of human nature. If I start from the basis that human beings are primarily interested in the survival and security of they and theirs, I sometimes get some perspective. From this place, I can understand the rationalization of the end justifying the means, from those who view something (like oil) necessary for their survival. Alliances are then formed from mutual entities seeking the same end result, but then alliances shift. I think the oil companies are the most obvious contenders for the prize, but the industries dependent on what they provide, may have an even greater interest in achieving the end, and are not locked in to any one plan or alliance. The different nations involved are evident because of the tools they bring to the party, but they are only the tip of the iceberg. What's happening below the surface is providing the cause to the effect we witness.

[Done]

24. The US Military is their private army

It's a lot cheaper than mercenaries since you only have to spend enough money to get your guy elected.

[The Backlash Cometh]

32. Yes, they serve, but out of patriotism, not as willing members to any

devious scheme. In fact, I think some military generals are catching on, and in the end, generals are bonded to their men. Once there's definitive proof that the military was used for someone's personal gain, I think the ice will break.

[madokie]

27. I can't believe I am only the second rec on this one

Peace

[gobbler91]

28. OT: Blitzer - Cheney Interview Redux

:-)
http://www.thisjustin.com/2007/02/19/blitzer-and-cheney-what-really-happened/

[newyawker99]

40. Hi gobbler91!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[gobbler91]

43. Thanks

!

[Geek_Girl]

29. I'm actually starting to believe the Saudi's are the ones pulling the strings

in all of this mess. PNAC folks got played and it's Bushco's and the Saudi's game now and it's called let make lots of money.

That's my theory.

[blm]

30. I've long believed they INTENDED to break the military so CORPORATE MILITARY can

take over - military loyal to the corporations paying them, and who this nation's taxpayers will STILL be funding.

This was BFEE's move back in 1991 when they first started PRIVATIZING parts of the military - Halliburton and DynCorp and now Blackwater are the beneficiaries.

[The Backlash Cometh]

33. I don't see the active military intentionally going along with this, if

they fully understood the depth of the plan. And it would be impossible to keep an Army of soldiers focused on serving out of "patriotism" once the evidence comes out to prove the extent of the manipulation.

[blm]

35. I agree with that, but regular agents didn't hijack and trash the CIA, either.

BushInc destroys from within using their own trusted few to undermine the whole.

[Virginia Dare]

65. Yes, I believe that too..

I also believe that Katrina was a test run for using that method in this country.

The grand plan is to bust the National Guard, so that those duties would have to be privatized, also related is the move of FEMA and Customs to Homeland Security, which is a bastion of privatization and a haven for corruption.

We're definitely heading that way.

[glitch]

68. Not just the military, the whole damn government of We the People.

They've never been on board with that.

[blm]

70. Good point about Katrina.

.

[merh]

31. Here ya go - something to consider

From the State of the Union - 2007

One of the first steps we can take together is to add to the ranks of our military — so that the American Armed Forces are ready for all the challenges ahead. Tonight I ask the Congress to authorize an increase in the size of our active Army and Marine Corps by 92,000 in the next five years. (DRAFT???) A second task we can take on together is to design and establish a volunteer Civilian Reserve Corps. Such a corps would function much like our military reserve. It would ease the burden on the Armed Forces by allowing us to hire civilians with critical skills to serve on missions abroad when America needs them. (HIRE MERCENARIES WITH FEDERAL FUNDS???) And it would give people across America who do not wear the uniform a chance to serve in the defining struggle of our time.

:freak: Is it me, or has he already said what he wants and how he plans to man those bases.

[The Backlash Cometh]

34. I don't think he intends to hire civilians.

If they were allowed to proceed, they would probably conscript them.

[merh]

36. Then why has he specifically asked for monies to hire the civilian corp

We have civilian employees, civilian volunteers and civilian "civil servants" working in the government and they do the tasks he refers to as it is.

If he wants to hire civilian military (security contractors), this is the way he frames the request.

Did you realize that civilian security guards are being used today to work the gates at some military bases here in the states?

Some group of folks sat down one day at their private club or country club and looked at the federal budget and all the employees working for it and their eyes flashed with greed. They decided that the money should go to private corporations, the budget was so huge someone should make a profit from it. Gradually, through this admin, they outsourcing has been happening, private companies doing what used to be handled by the military and/or the federal government itself. Now you see that he is proposing specific budgets for his "civilian corps" - by allowing us to hire civilians with critical skills to serve on missions abroad when America needs them.

[The Backlash Cometh]

38. I see what you mean. The old privatization.

I thought you were talking about civil servants.

[merh]

39. No, civil servants don't put the money in the private pockets.

And civil servants are subject to public/federal scrutiny.

Just as the DOD and this admin does today, casulaties aren't considered part of the effort, lost equipment and wounded aren't in the DOD stats. Then there is the matter of responsibility and hiring non-Americans with special skills. "Civil Corpsmen" can torture, kill, plunder and corrupt and the DOD/government can't be held responsible.

The oil interests are protected by civilians not subject to the "rules of law" the military is subject to, "their losses" are not "our losses" and the private corporations that employ the "civilian corps members", the corporate heads and boards and stock holders see the profits. And the oil companies don't have to worry about paying to secure their interests, the USA does it.

It's a win/win all the way around.

[The Backlash Cometh]

45. Also, easier to hide the paperwork.

They won't give up public records easily, unless you have an Army of lawyers to back up your request.

[merh]

55. exactly

it's a way to side step the taxpayers "right to know" - like the private corporations that make the voting machines "proprietary rights".

[TwilightGardener]

41. Not sure

but I think it would just be more of the same that's going on now in the active-duty military (my husband is an Air Force officer)--outsourcing to private contractors. My husband actually works primarily with civil servants. Even the gate guards to the AFB are civilian contractors. It's just that this CRC thing sounds more official and organized.

[merh]

72. out sourcing so that the private sector can pocket federal monies

that should go to the military and the vets. Why, pray tell, do civilian security guards, guard the gates to our military bases? All the armed forces have their own military police forces and those officers are well trained and able to do the job.

[The Backlash Cometh]

75. We must be the laughing stock of the world.

You know, where I was raised overseas things were dire for most people. When you live in poverty, people will help you where they can, actually, it's their obligation to help you, but that's going off tangent. The point I'd like to make is this, at some point, people laugh at you if you do something stupid that brings on your own demise or which makes your bad situation worse. They still help you, but they make you feel like a big fool for putting yourself in a bad position. Sort of makes you a little skittish about doing something stupid again, unless you like being branded as the village fool, in which case most people will put up with you for comic relief.

Now, when the planes flew into the WTC building, we had the sympathy of the people back in the country I grew up in. But when they discovered that the terrorists learned to fly planes from our own aviation schools, they rolled their eyes and gave that look they reserve for the village idiot who continually brings on his own demise.

How do you think these people will react the day they discover that the next military strength anthrax gets stolen by one of these privatized security guards? Or, worse, that these security guards have the key to every room on the military base and they turn out to be double agents?

[merh]

77. Seriously, it's embarassing and frightening.

I never thought of it in the terms as you have posted, but you are exactly right.

[wildbilln864]

80. And none of this shit....

could have went forward without 911!
Not the patriot act.
Not Iraq and Afghanistan.
Not the $9,000,000,000.00 missing!
Remember Rummy publicly stating that the pentagon couldn't account for $2.5 trillion on September 10th, 2001? :wtf:

All of it was planned in advance. It just needed a "new Pearl Harbor event" to be implemented! Hence September 11th, 2001!


But hey, I'm just worried about who gets custody of Anna Nicole's body! :eyes:

[wildbilln864]

84. kick!

damnit!
:hi:

[wildbilln864]

86. kick!

:hi:

[wrate]

87. Vanity and happiness are incompatible.

[Initech]

88. I've often wondered how WTC 7 fits into everything...

I work for an engineering firm and from what I'm told, the demolition plans are the hardest to set up. I agree that someone had to have known that the building was going to go beforehand.

[The Backlash Cometh]

89. What I don't understand about this part of the mystery is:

(1) How were the charges set in the days preceding the attacks, without the CIA staffers inside the building knowing what they were doing; and,

(2) Assuming that the building was a brought down without the CIA's approval, why aren't they hot on the trail of the people who did bring it down?

[Initech]

90. That's another question I ponder - who brought down WTC 7 exactly?

And why did it go down days after the other buildings did? I wouldn't buy the "it collapsed on its own foundation" excuse in a million years. Hell, no one I work for, or with, would buy it either.

And I also wonder what was inside the building at the time?

[wildbilln864]

91. there was a complete...

power down days before the collapses from the 50th floor up as I understand it. No cams, electronic locks, etc were working during the powerdowns. Not sure how long it lasted though. It's all available on the web though. There's so much about it that most just don't realize!
:hi:

[The Backlash Cometh]

94. Well, here's a thought.

If it was a controlled demolition, possibly they didn't report it beforehand because they didn't want people running back to save personal belongings?; and or, if they were trying to hide something, there is a number of things:

(1) Destroy evidence in CIA files that might have been embarrassing to people who were now in power;

(2) Destroy evidence which might have interfered with their plans to proceed in Iraq.