Hi Don,
Re: My question to you would be, how many times should we rehash the same information that has already been rehashed many times already?
Objection. Leading. (To use the parlance of TV courtrooms. <wink>)
There's a big difference between the pejorative term "rehashing" and the more well-regarded terms like "amplified", "corroborated", "refined" and "verified", for example.
Thus, we could spend more time here discussing the ground-breaking analysis of Chapter 19 of Michael Ruppert's new book "Crossing the Rubicon" with its radical and probably correct analysis of the wargaming going on on the morning of September 11, 2001 with the other resources we have available on that particular subjectmatter.
Thus, a "rehashing" of these three data sources could yield a new and more damning synthesis of the facts regarding Cheney's
and Rumsfeld's malevolent aims in confusing the U.S.'s air defense systems.
Chapter 19: WARGAMES AND HIGH TECH: PARALYZING THE SYSTEM TO PULL OFF THE ATTACKS
newsociety.com
Compare to:
Oil Empire: Standdown:
oilempire.us
Mark Elsis: Standdown:
standdown.net
Paul Thompson: Complete 9/11 Timeline: "Failure to Defend the Skies on 9/11":
cooperativeresearch.net
I believe that a "rehash" of this material will lead to the inevitable conclusion, and an important conclusion, that the Kean Commission's report is quite simply a fantasy, a cover-up and a whitewash of the crimes committed at the highest levels of command and control within our military and civilian branches of government. No other conclusion is possible.
***
Re: at what point is it appropriate to move forward in identifying places where our system of government has become so corrupted, that events such as 9/11 are likely to occur at any time and any place, whenever a political benefit may be derived from such events, and without any recourse by the people?
The answer is NOW! We must identify those in the government who clearly had motive, opportunity and cover to perpetrate the heinous crimes of 9/11. It should be obvious from the above discussion of the standdown / war games evidence presented above that the following persons should be considered armed and dangerous to the future of our constitutional Republic:
Dick Cheney
Don Rumsfeld
Richard Myers
Ralph Eberhardt
Additionally, when we examine the evidence of supervisory interference with ongoing anti-terror investigations in the summer of 2001 we will necessarily have to add the following to the list of co-conspirators:
Condolezza Rice
John Ashcroft
Robert Mueller
David Frasca
"Chip" Bowman
and others.
When we examine the cabal of war planners who benefitted themselves or their "causes" by making use a "the new Pearl Harbor" in order to instigate colonial wars of conquest we will add:
George W. Bush
Frank Carlucci
Jeb Bush
George H.W. Bush
Richard Perle
Paul Wolfowitz
other PNAC signatories
Office of Special Plans personnel
among others
***
Re: Are these things truly unrelated?
No, but my point was that a lot of the clutter on this board is created when posters fail to relate their comments to the appropriate topic described in the thread header.
***
Re: Once armed with the facts, is it inappropriate to discuss causes and conditions?
That was not what I was objecting to. My concern was that the thread was becoming useless because it had lost its focus.
***
Re: Is there a point where remaining on the treadmill of historical research is no longer productive?
I thought so as of last summer, so I stepped off the treadmill and commenced a documentary film series here locally. I know I've reached about 800 people here who gained a new degree of skepticism of the official story based upon my efforts.
***
Re: If so, what is the next step?
For me, the next step will continue to be educating myself and sharing my knowledge with others. I would hope to do so by means of some sort of a newsletter or other written word. Additionally, I will most likely be organizing a few "talking sessions" where 9/11 skeptics can gather here locally (after the election) to share resources and chart a course of action.
Luckily for us, there will be a progressive majority on our new City Council after the November 2 elections. One of my goals is to persuade this Council to sign resolutions in opposition to the colonial war in Iraq, in opposition to the USA PATRIOT Act and in favor of re-opening the 9/11 investigation with a commission that isn't anything like the Kean Commission and its infestation of insiders.
***
Re: Would there be any benefit in starting a new thread, with more of a forward looking perspective, but based on the research that has taken place here?
Yes, we could have a thread that was more oriented toward activism, although this would perhaps be redundant with this other effort:
septembereleventh.org
"The time to hesitate is through,
no time to wallow in the mire,
come on, baby, light my fire."
***
Re: Personally, I find the occasional off topic discussions to be of interest at times.
It would be a kindness if those posting off-topic material would make note of it at the top of their posts so that those of us who want to be more focused and less distracted could know that the item is trivial and best passed over. Alternatively, there are plenty of other threads on SI which are better suited for discussion of topics such as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Iraq, foreign policy in general and electoral politics. It would be nice to keep the clutter down on this thread, IMO.
Best, Ray |
