We are not alone! As America nears the sixth anniversary of the world-churning events of September 11, 2001, a new Zogby International poll finds a majority of Americans still await a Congressional investigation of President Bush's and Vice President Cheney's actions before, during and after the 9/11 attacks. Over 30% also believe Bush and/or Cheney should be immediately impeached by the House of Representatives. 67% also fault 9/11 Commission for not investigating the anomalous collapse of World Trade Center 7More from (friend of the show) BradBlog.
16 comments:
I suspect the numbers are even highter -- probably a lot higher --once you count the people who are just being cautious not to say anything about it openly. A truly anonymous poll would probably show a significant increase.
Here is a pretty funny clip produced by MoveOn.org about the upcoming "progess" report:
http://tinyurl.com/3x6s9x
As a side note, I haven't been able to get to my favorite "9/11 live footage archive" web site at all today:
http://www.archive.org/details/sept_11_tv_archive
Too bad. I hope the reason is that it is being flooded by inquisitive Truthers and not that it has not been taken down!
A truly anonymous poll of all Americans would show how far off the mark you people and your movement really are.
Take a poll in my town and 99% would say the "Truth" movement is a bunch of BS. And we know what BS is in this part of the country...otherwise known as the Heart of America as opposed to the loony coasters.
Polls mean NOTHING! Left or Right. It still amazes me how naive you all are.
Maybe you are right, Life. Nevertheless, I was intrigued by Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s argument that, as inaccurate as polls can be, exit polls at elections are deemed relatively accurate around the world and are often used to gauge the legitimacy of elections, even by the current administration. Ironically, the only country that seems to pooh-pooh the exit polls in favor of election results (in cases where there are questionable results) is the US:
http://tinyurl.com/qrvrv
Well, lb, you got one thing right. I'm sure all of you heart-landers do know what BS is -- since you're all full of it.
Okay, my favorite 9/11 live-footage archive site is back up and ready for action, so I can finish this post...
More on September Clues:
One of the strongest arguments September Clues presents in favor of TV fakery was TV footage showing the second plane going right through WTC2 with its nose coming out the other side before the whole thing explodes.
The coverage of this by September Clues (called "Shot 3") starts at the time marker of 6:40 in the Part 1 video as found on the web site:
http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/108.html
September Clues puts forth an impressive, yet highly involved scenario entailing an apparent mistake made by "CGI people" who had drawn in a fake airplane and failed to erase it in time before it went out the other side of the building. The perpetrators apparently did what they could to cover up their mistakes, but they are no match for our September Clues sleuths.
The only footage I was able to find of this in the "live broadcast archives" is from CNN, and even then it was only a "replay" after the initial event occurred:
(See starting at about 21:00 in the following video):
http://www.archive.org/details/cnn200109110848-0929
Note the commentator says, "The plane went right through!"
To September Clues' credit, they did bring attention to the fact that this clip seems to have disappeared rather rapidly from the mainstream media and there appears to be a concerted effort to cover-up the evidence showing that the plane seems to have gone right through the building.
My own simple take on all this is that the plane went through the building. Perhaps the remote controllers missed their target slightly. As with the first plane, the second plane was probably supposed to run into the core of the tower, but obviously it missed and went out the northeast corner of WTC2.
As for September Clues' statement that "it's impossible for planes to go through steel buildings," I was never big on the word "impossible" to begin with, but other explanations may be that either the facades of the buildings had been treated beforehand to weaken them or the planes had special reinforcements on their noses to help them crash into the buildings as they did w/o anything ending up on the outside of the building -- or both -- or even neither -- if you consider the nose of the plane may have gone mostly through a window and the nose of the plane may have been a lot more damaged coming out the other end than what we can see.
Some evidence that parts of a real plane went through WTC2 is in every live broadcast footage shown of WTC2 afterward: whenever any of them do a zoom in shot of WTC2, you can see something on fire hanging out the northeast corner of WTC2. Here are just two examples:
From ABC footage beginning at 9:12am, see clips from 0:58-1:04 and 1:56-2:06 in the following video link:
http://www.archive.org/details/abc200109110912-0954
From NBC footage beginning at 9:12am, see the clip from 22:50-23:00 in the following video link:
http://www.archive.org/details/nbc200109110912-0954
The most ironic of all is a comment from Theresa Renaud, the eyewitness who was completely torpedoed by September Clues, mostly just for being the wife of a TV producer and also for being some distance away. Ms. Renaud reported seeing something on fire protruding from the South Tower, despite Bryant Gumbel not being able to see it from his perspective:
From CBS footage beginning at 9:12am, see the video clip from 9:21-9:52:
http://www.archive.org/details/cbs200109110912-0954
We can play the devil's advocate here and say, well, maybe Ms. Renaud didn't have the view she claims, even with binoculars, and maybe the CGI people from CNN called up CBS and told them to tell Ms. Renaud to make up seeing something protruding from the building, while all major networks quickly worked to CGI a piece of a plane on fire, etc...
It seems more likely, from Bryant Gumbel's reaction and no follow-up by any of the other networks on this, that there may have been a concerted effort at some level to hide the fact that the plane went through the building. This is (weakly) supported by a follow-up interview that Bryant Gumbel has with Ms. Renaud a few minutes later beginning at around 12:25 in the aforementioned live footage video. Ms. Renaud reiterates what she sees from her view, but omits the part about seeing something protruding from the South Tower.
Geezus....am I the only adult here? MS..you can KMA...ANYONE with a brain and half a full deck knows that polls are skewed to the target audience after the pollsters get the results they want. Give me a GD break.
And, if it wasn't for guys like me and my dad and g-dad and grt-grnd dad scooping the BS, you candy asses would be eating tofu for bfast, lunch, and supper.
There's no doubt in my mind you people aren't stupid, but you amaze me and all my associates with your gullibility to be led around like a bunch of hogs with nose rings.
and....on the lighter side...try graboid.com....Soylent Green Are PEEEEEOple...!!!!
That would be a quote from Charleon Heston... Greatest Pres of the NRA ever!!!!!
You are your own rebuttal.
No response is necessary.
I don't have a TV, but I like reading Bill Maher transcripts from his web site whenever I have the chance. The one I recently read, from the August 31, 2007, program, reminds me a little of you, Life -- at least when John Mellencamp discusses the good people of middle-America...
http://www.billmaher.com/index.php?page_id=201
It's a foreign country to us coasters for sure. Maybe what Mellencamp says will tick you off because it's still not that accurate, but at least I'm here trying to understand a little better...
I just discovered a new pundit who has the same views as I do --
he says Bush is purposely keeping the fighting in Iraq going for monetary gains, the Democrats have done squat to stop Bush, and we should consider abolishing the IRS and replace it with a simpler tax system.
Oh, wait a minute, the new pundit is Osama bin Laden! Whoops...
http://tinyurl.com/2fva2z
For those interested in analyzing the media, here is another take on the same story, only this time from an AP writer:
http://tinyurl.com/2jlrds
A few things I noticed...
The story by Paul Haven of AP (the second link above) is about twice as long as the story by Warren P. Strobel of McClatchy Newspapers, yet the Haven story has only part of one short direct quote from the actual transcript of bin Laden's video tape. Strobel's article has 7 relatively lengthy direct quotes.
Nearly every paragraph of Strobel's article states a verifiable fact or a quote directly from bin Laden. Nearly every paragraph of Haven's article states an opinion or a quote from an "expert."
Here is Strobel's title and opening paragraph:
Bin Laden tape needles Bush and Democrats on Iraq
"In his first videotaped message in nearly three years, terrorist leader Osama bin Laden accuses President Bush of leading the United States to failure in Iraq and needles congressional Democrats for not stopping the war"
Here is Haven's title and opening paragraph:
Bin Laden tape: timing over substance
"Osama bin Laden's latest message is a hodgepodge of anti-capitalist vitriol, impassioned Islamic evangelism and what can best be described as a twisted attempt at reconciliation: Join us, or we'll kill you."
Is that really what bin Laden said? Let's see how Strobel covered that aspect of the tape, since I'd rather have the facts and get the information straight from the horse's mouth...
In the video, titled "The Solution," bin Laden offers two solutions for ending the war.
"The first is from our side, and it is to continue to escalate the killing and fighting against you. This is our duty, and our brothers are carrying it out, and I ask Allah to grant them resolve and victory," he says.
The second, he said, is for Americans to "embrace Islam." He said there are no taxes under Islam— apart from a 2.5 percent Zakat or annual alms.
To me, if you want to paraphrase it to five words or less, it seems a little more accurate to say that bin Laden said, "Islam: simpler taxes for peace" (which I believe is the slogan bin Laden had on his t-shirt in the video, no?) not "Join us or we'll kill you," but maybe it's just me...
The Shakespeare Truth Movement has arrived! Where have you been all my life?
http://tinyurl.com/ynv7d3
I of course immediately disagree with some of their best guesses about the truth: they seem to think a poor commoner like Shakespeare himself couldn't possibly be smart enough to write such work, and it had to be done by somebody pulling in at least a six figure salary for their day (apparently, they've been talking with way too many "intellectuals" from San Francisco).
I mean, isn't it obvious just by reading even one work of "Shakespeare" -- it was really a penniless, closeted bi/lesbian commoner, probably Shakespeare's wife or lover or sister or other female relative or all of the above coming together for a progressive story-telling club and afternoon tea, lead by the required closeted bi/lesbian. Sheesh. How obvious can it be?
LOL
Okay, just thought we needed a little levity before next weeks' media circus with the anti-Truthers and pro-Iraqi warrers.
BTW, unlike that disagreeable (to me) petition from Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth, where it is written something like: "Dear Congress, we at Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth demand a new investigation into 9/11 events, one that is headed by the distinguished Professor Steven Jones and focuses solely on molten steel and thermite, which we all know cuts steel like butter -- and any mention of dustification is not allowed anywhere near this petition nor will be allowed in any new investigation as far as we're concerned, lest the real truth accidentally come out..."
yes, unlike that petition, the one for the Shakespeare Truth Movement states something much more reasonable, so I went ahead and signed it today without even reading any of it except the last paragraph, which states:
"We make no claim, in signing this declaration, to know exactly what happened, who wrote the works, nor even that Mr. Shakspere definitely did not. Individual signatories will have their personal views about the author; but all we claim here is that there is "room for doubt," and other reasonable scenarios are possible."
What a novel basis for truth seeking! We are going to pose questions with an open mind, allow polite free speech, and have loads of fun along the way letting our imaginations run free with what may very well end up being the truth after some previously undiscovered facts start to surface from our investigations.
Anyway, in what I should have put in the first line of this post, but wanted to force anybody even remotely interested to read my opinions, here is the info on the petition and how to sign it:
http://www.doubtaboutwill.org/
There is certainly no doubt that everyone here has let their imaginations run free!
Post a Comment