Maggie
27th December 2015, 18:49
I admit that I am still on the "conspiracy" track. Since day one of 9/11, I was very upset about what was foisted on us and the planned murder and the war on terror. I was upset that people believed and still believe the story.. ...But also, I do not think my opinions are always congruent with others. So, I can see why there is so much inability to gain traction as a concerted front. I apologize for needing to speak about the RR incident that is UP in the alt media world....
When I hear about someone else talking about the incidents I am following, I always have my own memory and own thinking that is there too. That means I am a biased opinionated person BUT I want to see GOOD evidence to form my changing opinions...
I have been following the conspiracy because on the first day, I could SEE that no plane hit the Pentagon> I could read that George Bush was NOT surprised. He did not follow the protocol when a major attack has hit "America" (which is what he said he realized it WAS?) He sat reading "My Pet Goat" to the school kids and later his explanation:
Why did I keep reading 'My Pet Goat'? To give people confidence, says Bush (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/why-did-i-keep-reading-my-pet-goat-to-give-people-confidence-says-bush-2328663.html)He wasn't rattled; instead, George W Bush was attempting to project an aura of calm as he mulled over news that terrorists had flown hijacked aeroplanes into the World Trade Centre in New York.
The former President has given a rare interview explaining why his reaction to the 9/11 attacks, which occurred while he visited a school in Florida, involved looking blankly before reading out loud from the book My Pet Goat.
"My first reaction was anger. Who the hell would do that to America? Then I immediately focused on the children, and the contrast between the attack and the innocence of children," he says in a National Geographic Channel documentary. "I made the decision not to jump up... and leave the classroom... I didn't want to rattle the kids. I wanted to project a sense of calm."
From that day and because I was already a little familiar with the Project for the New American Century and how this fit in with a horrible plan....
he Project for the New American Century (PNAC) was a neoconservative[1][2][3] think tank based in Washington, D.C. that focused on United States foreign policy. It was established as a non-profit educational organization in 1997, and founded by William Kristol and Robert Kagan.[4][5] The PNAC's stated goal was "to promote American global leadership".[6] The organization stated that "American leadership is good both for America and for the world," and sought to build support for "a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity".[7]
Of the twenty-five people who signed the PNAC's founding statement of principles, ten went on to serve in the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush, including Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz.[8][9][10][11] Observers such as Irwin Stelzer and Dave Grondin have suggested that the PNAC played a key role in shaping the foreign policy of the Bush Administration, particularly in building support for the Iraq War.[12][13][14][15] Academics such as Inderjeet Parmar, Phillip Hammond, and Donald E. Abelson have said PNAC's influence on the George W. Bush administration has been exaggeratedProject for the New American Century wiki (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century)
I read just about everything I could find then and since.
There are people who have studied more than I and many have detailed analysis.
In researching the evidence, we can find many details to support various means of 'how" it was accomplished.
I am MOST interested that this was NOT anything about the identified terrorists and we can see what was immediately accepted by the world as a response to TERROR.
Personally I am curious about
1.The hurricane that suddenly turned directions off the east US coast(and was not mentioned in the MSM?)
2.All kinds of anomalies that we could make a long list concerning.
3. My woowoo mind likes the ideas of holograms, CGI, energy beam weapons (in conjunction with known weapons) and I apologize if I offend anyone with my own pet theories.
I was terror-fied by this assault because I saw it was planned to change the world and it has changed the world....More people are becoming aware of the incongruence and the way we were herded into the willingness to accept war(ssss) on TERROR.
Then RR aka MG aka KoreAnn entered the scene with what seemed TO ME an un-necessarily convoluted and contradictory story about planes in the air, murdered passengers and etc. and that ALSO pinned Mossad (and they were WITH the USA surely on it IMO but it was a JOINT effort IMO between all Military Industrial Complex beneficiaries).
What SURPRISED me about RR was that people lauded her and championed her story as if they had been waiting for just this story and HERE I cannot understand?
Now the "truthers" are trying to sort all this out while MY Question is..... why didn't her story raise questions at the start?
There need not necessarily be "controversy" in determining the provenance of information.
Why did people rush to love her story anyway because it seemed TO ME the story was a red herring?
Why did a sudden highlighting of her story appear?
What is happening where researchers I respect (like Jim Fetzer) are trolled because they question this weird (IMO) "whistleblower" contribution?
And it's like the alt media is a bloody shark fest lately and I feel so sad as this pattern of controversy IMO cannot generate momentum for new insights.....Maggie
So here is an example of the angst triggered
GpQzjeSk-sA
When I hear about someone else talking about the incidents I am following, I always have my own memory and own thinking that is there too. That means I am a biased opinionated person BUT I want to see GOOD evidence to form my changing opinions...
I have been following the conspiracy because on the first day, I could SEE that no plane hit the Pentagon> I could read that George Bush was NOT surprised. He did not follow the protocol when a major attack has hit "America" (which is what he said he realized it WAS?) He sat reading "My Pet Goat" to the school kids and later his explanation:
Why did I keep reading 'My Pet Goat'? To give people confidence, says Bush (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/why-did-i-keep-reading-my-pet-goat-to-give-people-confidence-says-bush-2328663.html)He wasn't rattled; instead, George W Bush was attempting to project an aura of calm as he mulled over news that terrorists had flown hijacked aeroplanes into the World Trade Centre in New York.
The former President has given a rare interview explaining why his reaction to the 9/11 attacks, which occurred while he visited a school in Florida, involved looking blankly before reading out loud from the book My Pet Goat.
"My first reaction was anger. Who the hell would do that to America? Then I immediately focused on the children, and the contrast between the attack and the innocence of children," he says in a National Geographic Channel documentary. "I made the decision not to jump up... and leave the classroom... I didn't want to rattle the kids. I wanted to project a sense of calm."
From that day and because I was already a little familiar with the Project for the New American Century and how this fit in with a horrible plan....
he Project for the New American Century (PNAC) was a neoconservative[1][2][3] think tank based in Washington, D.C. that focused on United States foreign policy. It was established as a non-profit educational organization in 1997, and founded by William Kristol and Robert Kagan.[4][5] The PNAC's stated goal was "to promote American global leadership".[6] The organization stated that "American leadership is good both for America and for the world," and sought to build support for "a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity".[7]
Of the twenty-five people who signed the PNAC's founding statement of principles, ten went on to serve in the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush, including Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz.[8][9][10][11] Observers such as Irwin Stelzer and Dave Grondin have suggested that the PNAC played a key role in shaping the foreign policy of the Bush Administration, particularly in building support for the Iraq War.[12][13][14][15] Academics such as Inderjeet Parmar, Phillip Hammond, and Donald E. Abelson have said PNAC's influence on the George W. Bush administration has been exaggeratedProject for the New American Century wiki (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century)
I read just about everything I could find then and since.
There are people who have studied more than I and many have detailed analysis.
In researching the evidence, we can find many details to support various means of 'how" it was accomplished.
I am MOST interested that this was NOT anything about the identified terrorists and we can see what was immediately accepted by the world as a response to TERROR.
Personally I am curious about
1.The hurricane that suddenly turned directions off the east US coast(and was not mentioned in the MSM?)
2.All kinds of anomalies that we could make a long list concerning.
3. My woowoo mind likes the ideas of holograms, CGI, energy beam weapons (in conjunction with known weapons) and I apologize if I offend anyone with my own pet theories.
I was terror-fied by this assault because I saw it was planned to change the world and it has changed the world....More people are becoming aware of the incongruence and the way we were herded into the willingness to accept war(ssss) on TERROR.
Then RR aka MG aka KoreAnn entered the scene with what seemed TO ME an un-necessarily convoluted and contradictory story about planes in the air, murdered passengers and etc. and that ALSO pinned Mossad (and they were WITH the USA surely on it IMO but it was a JOINT effort IMO between all Military Industrial Complex beneficiaries).
What SURPRISED me about RR was that people lauded her and championed her story as if they had been waiting for just this story and HERE I cannot understand?
Now the "truthers" are trying to sort all this out while MY Question is..... why didn't her story raise questions at the start?
There need not necessarily be "controversy" in determining the provenance of information.
Why did people rush to love her story anyway because it seemed TO ME the story was a red herring?
Why did a sudden highlighting of her story appear?
What is happening where researchers I respect (like Jim Fetzer) are trolled because they question this weird (IMO) "whistleblower" contribution?
And it's like the alt media is a bloody shark fest lately and I feel so sad as this pattern of controversy IMO cannot generate momentum for new insights.....Maggie
So here is an example of the angst triggered
GpQzjeSk-sA