The 9/11 Discussion.

[Maxx]

Maxx, how could you think some people in government are fine decent people? They are either part of the conspiracy or they don't have the balls to report one of the largest crimes in history or they're just plain stupid for not believing in the same stuff that you read.

For the same reason why I think you are a fine decent person. They have a blindness when it comes to seeing the evil that is in certain parts of the government. They then equate our government with our country and then wrap themselves up in the flag.  They want to think happy thoughts all the time. They think our government is fair and kind and represents justice just like the Sheriff of Mayberry does. But at the same time they accept the military torturing people and imprisoning them without trials. I can't blame the average government worker as they and much of the American people have been conditioned. As example they shut off common sense and reasoning when there is a conflict with what they have been taught to believe. George Orwell wrote a book about such people. But that was about people accepting TV cameras everywhere to protect them from "Goldstein" and his conspirators and not RFID microchips protecting them from "Osama Bin Ladin" and Al Qaeda. I will never feel comfortable or free if Big Brother is watching me.

Maxx

[BillyB]

Maxx, who are you going to vote for and why haven't they got the balls to announce what Bush was involved with on 9/11? Does that person even believe in the conspiracy theory or just plain ignorant as I on how the World operates?

[Maxx]

I'll vote for Ron Paul as you know. From what I have observed in him is that he is being the politician on this issue. I can't believe that he can see through the Federal Reserve scheme and all the other schemes and not see through this deception. The way the one woman reporter that was badgering  him about his association with Alex Jones it was clear that she did not buy his statement that he did not believe the government was involved in 911. This subject is as touchy as Social Security.

If he was to get in and shut down the Fed as he says he would then he would have to follow up by doing a complete housekeeping throughout the government and law enforcement institutions. To straighten out this government there would have to be something akin to a Stalinist purge with Federal employees. The heads would have to retire. Otherwise they would sabotage his other efforts at every turn. Those FBI agents that seen the Arabs training to fly commercial airliners and seen the money coming into the country to fund all this. Their superiors that tried to hush them up need to go. Very very unlikely.

Maxx

[BillyB]

I'll vote for Ron Paul as you know.

Ron Paul. Yes, the man with two first names. That guy has gotten his hands on more pussy(not his wife's) than Bill Clinton has had in his dreams.

Maxx, as you know, Ron Paul is running on the Republican ticket. Yes, the same party Bush and Cheney is in. He is being supported by the same party who supported Bush and Cheney.  Doesn't that disgust you just a little bit that he's rubbing elbows with those two monsters? Why didn't he speak out against them during live televised debates? Doesn't he care about the truth of 9/11 getting to the public or or only cares about himself getting the Presidency? If he does become President, he may even have to shake hands with Bush during inauguration. Don't you think he will tow the party lines to some degree? We're talking about the party who sponsored the 9/11 event.

[Maxx]

Ron Paul. Yes, the man with two first names. That guy has gotten his hands on more pussy(not his wife's) than Bill Clinton has had in his dreams.

Maxx, as you know, Ron Paul is running on the Republican ticket. Yes, the same party Bush and Cheney is in. He is being supported by the same party who supported Bush and Cheney.  Doesn't that disgust you just a little bit that he's rubbing elbows with those two monsters? Why didn't he speak out against them during live televised debates? Doesn't he care about the truth of 9/11 getting to the public or or only cares about himself getting the Presidency? If he does become President, he may even have to shake hands with Bush during inauguration. Don't you think he will tow the party lines to some degree? We're talking about the party who sponsored the 9/11 event.

I am certain that a very high percentage of Ron Paul supporters including Ron Paul himself are not too thrilled about the Republican party. Ron Paul ran as the Libertarian candidate back in 2000 I believe. That party is closer to his ideals than are the Republicans by a long shot. But lets face it it is easier to get elected by running as an Republican with his record (below) than by as third party candidate.

In regard to his shaking hands and being civil. I do not see this as something that would affect his principals and voting record or if he became president his veto record. He is known as "Congressman "No"" on Capital Hill. He votes against farm subsidises even though some of his constituents back home ask for them. He votes against any tax increases and even voted against VAWA. Would he compromise? I doubt it. He's 72 years old and knows he has but a few years left. If he has lived a principled life and it seems he has. Then why would he finish his life compromising and making dirty deals that cost lives and the fortunes of innocent people? 

Neither the Republican or Democrat party did 911. People did 911. The people that pushed it could care less what party one belongs too. Hillary Clinton says she will keep the troops in Iraq until 2011. Hillary loathes the military. I doubt if she loves war. The decision was made for her by these people. Same as for Bush. The two parties are just the "left-right dumb show" to make people think they have a choice and to keep them distracted as to what is really going on.


Here is his Ron Paul's record and promises

He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.

He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.

He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.

He says he will abolish the IRS
He says he will abolish the Federal Reserve System
He says he will return the nation to the gold standard
He says he will return the troops home immediately

[BillyB]

Maxx,

I know what Ron Paul is about and I believe he's a good man but if one is to believe Bush did 9/11 which is a horrendous act, then Ron Paul would look like an angel if he associated with the mafia  to get to the Presidency instead of Bush. At minimum, it's hypocritical for anyone to associate with the people who did 9/11 and advertise they're going to do good for the nation. I don't think Bush did 9/11 so it's not hypocritical of me when I say Ron Paul is a good man.

[Maxx]

One thing we should learn from this thread is that people including me and you do not always see the same things or agree to the same things when presented with the same evidence.  Perhaps Ron Paul has done what you may have done? Or what I may have done? Put the blinders on because he can't deal with the truth. Who knows? Few people I would call bad or even hypocritical. They just walk in their own reality and that reality is made up of what they can deal with. "Cognitive dissonance". Firefighters are called "it" because it explains away an inconvenient statement to what they want to perceive as true. Seemingly nice guys like Larry Silverstein could be in a plot that killed thousands and yet not look emotionally destroyed when interviewed only a short year later. 

Here's the thing. In regard to Silverstein or Bush we do not know who knew what on that day. Perhaps Silverstein had no prior knowledge to 911 yet others working around him did? Perhaps George Bush had no prior knowledge of 911 yet those working around him did? Bush more than Silverstein would have more knowledge to work off after 911. This would implicate him in a cover up and the continuation of the plan. It does seem he stacked the deck on the 911 commission. Then there is Iraq and of course Afghanistan with the oil pipelines running through it.


Maxx

[andrewfi]

A small thought from a bloke who knows nothing about explosives or demolition, but a little about people.

If one were going to demolish the WTC and then claim the casue was impact of airplanes it would make perfect sense to set charges to demolish the building BUT one would not want to make the job too perfect - that'd give the game away.

But, on the other hand it would not be possible to simply set a big old bomb to do the job becasue it would either NOT do the job or be obviously wrong.

So, IF people were to be involved in a controlled demolition of the WTC buildings they'd have two constraints upon them (among many others of course). Not doing the job too well and not doing the job too badly.
That is why this is a people thing.
Don't just look at the technical issues.

All I know of demolition is what I have seen on the tv.
All I know of buildings collapsing is what I have seen on the tv.

My non-expert eyes saw something MUCH more akin to demolition than to a random collapse of a building.

I do know that controlled demolition is MUCH more efficient than a random explosion and many observers have noted that it was unlikely that even all the jetfuel in the planes would have been enough to have had the effect claimed for it.

I have no idea WHAT lies have been told to the American people and the world about 9/11. I have no dount that the American people and the world HAVE been lied to.
I also know that there is clear precedent for this kind of action.

[BillyB]

I have no idea WHAT lies have been told to the American people and the world about 9/11. I have no dount that the American people and the world HAVE been lied to.

Lies are either coming from the conspiracy theorists or the US government. Of course we've all been lied to. 

Andrew, you do not need to melt steel for a column to fail, you just need to heat it up to weaken it. You ever see men bend steel with their own hands when making swords? Just think if you placed an extra tens of thousands of tons on fatigued steel. You'll have the twin towers droping on itself, floor by floor.

Ask yourself why did one jet plane land in a field without hitting it's target?

Why did Bush need to demo the WTC? The first plane that hit would have accomplished war with Osama. Afganistan only got involved because they refused to turn him over.

Andrew, what would Bush have accomplished by doing this? Has the US benefited economically, popularity wise, or politically in the World arena? Or do you believe what Maxx has said that the 9/11 incident is the first step towards the US government's total control?

[Maxx]

I look forward to his answers as well

Billy, both the administration and the conspiracy guys could be tellling us lies, I figured this out with my study of the JFK assassination. All the theories on who did it and why. The conspiracy researchers would adopt their pet theory and exclude all the facts that got in their way. Same for the government  It all boiled done to what was most likely after the exculpatory evidence was factored in.


Maxx

[BillyB]

Maxx, I watch a Discovery or History channel recreating the JFK assassination. They debunked every conspiracy theory there was. Timeframe and bullet paths using same model gun shot at the same angle from the building was done successfully. Maybe the video can be found through Google. People who are satisfied with History events like me have already done research looking at both sides of the story. Maxx, will you locate and watch the videos that debunk the JFK conspiracy theory and not believe only one side of the story?

Maxx, I'm aware that nobody and no government is completely honest but I'm satisfied with the US going to war with Iraq. Although wMD's were the selling point but there is the interest of oil in Iraq and that is a motivational factor for us as it was for France and Russia trying to prevent war. Of course they were dealing for oil under the table going around UN resolutions. In this dog eat dog World there is always somebody trying to get to the top and bring you down. It may be hard for some of you guys to believe, but the US may be more ethical and play by the rules better than most nations who can't abide by UN resolutions. Even the UN can't control it's own programs ethically such as with the oil for food program.

Maxx, if I remember right, you are a man of faith. Don't let yourself get too worked up over World affairs beyond your control. You have one vote and of course you can speak you mind about what is wrong in this World but don't let your life revolve around those problems. You may have comfort knowing that God will sort this out in the end.

[ECR844]

I guess at the end of the day some of us can take solace in the fact that we will just never look out our windows to see HRT arriving to bring us for a ride.......

[Cameraguy]

Andrew, what would Bush have accomplished by doing this? Has the US benefited economically, popularity wise, or politically in the World arena? Or do you believe what Maxx has said that the 9/11 incident is the first step towards the US government's total control?

Billy, these are good questions. If you'll broaden your scope beyond presidents, governments, Democrats, Republicans and politics, you'll understand that these are irrelevent issues that are meant to distract and divide us. 9/11 was pulled off by a small faction of very powerful globalists who have no particular national, political or ideological affiliations or goals except their continuing concentration of wealth, power and control. The US government has unfortunately been hijacked by these globalists who are literally bent on world domination. Communism was no longer a threat, so they needed a new enemy. 9/11 became the means to create that enemy and justify endless war under the guise of eliminating WMDs, depose dictators, establish "democracy", stop violence or whatever the current rationale is. This "war on terror" is nothing more than a giant ruse, the global version of divide and conquer. It's the oldest trick in the book and the quickest way to concentrate resources and transfer public wealth into private. This is why the Iraq war has been so heavily privatized. It's also why there's been a push for war with Iran, even when all 16 intelligence agencies of the NIE say there's no threat. Bush is simply a puppet or tool of this shadow globalist government. So was Clinton. So was Bush 41. So is every '08 presidential candidate who are CFR members, except Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich. This is why our political parties have become The War Party and The War Party Lite. 

This power structure used to be called the military/industrial complex, but it's actually a consortium of international banking, oil and pharmaceutical companies, along with secret societies like Skull & Bones, the Bilderbergs (European), the Freemasons and others. Think of it as a global mafia that controls significant parts of American culture, including much of the government, ALL of the media, even education and the medical establishment. This has been been going on for a very long time, but the modern incarnation began after WWII when Rockefeller's Standard Oil made a secret pact with the German pharmaceutical giant I.G. Farben to form global market monopolies and not compete with each other. Over time, this allowed them to gain enormous wealth, power and political influence. Eisenhower warned about this shadow government during his presidential farewell speech. Kennedy actually tried to fight it with plans to dismantle the CIA, end the Vietnam war and establish a federal currency (unlike our "Federal Reserve", which is neither.)

Be careful of forming opinions based on TV programs or MSM articles. Much of it is false. I say this as someone who's spent most of my life working in the media and defending it. Until you know the entire history and understand the power structure that currently exists, your opinions and beliefs are being expertly molded and manipulated beyond a level that you could imagine. TV and the MSM are little more than entertaining distractions and sophisticated methods of propaganda and brainwashing. You're a smart guy, but you're no match for the forces that will literally say or do anything to mislead and control you. Mayer Amschel Bauer, who founded the Rothschild banking dynasty, said "Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes it's laws." The same should be said of the media and it's corporate masters.

So no matter who becomes president, Republican or Democrat, I'm afraid it'll be another 'Say hello to the new boss. Same as the old boss.'

And if Ron Paul miraculously gets elected, he'll probably last as long as the Kennedys.

~CG

[ECR844]

"Camera Guy,"

   Could you kindly enlighten us as to who or whom you think is actually running this unprecedented cooperative conglomerate? Most reasonable people realize that every organization has a micro level and a macro level. So let's skip the macro and the puppets and proxies, and concentrate on the envisioned 'puppet master' or perhaps 'politburo' style committee which wields all of this power. Who are those who are in charge, kindly name them.

Additionally could you please point all of us ignorant folks to your sources and materials so that we too can travel down the path of the enlightened?

Thanks,
ECR844

For your viewing pleasure I'm going to include a photo of a brave SF warrior who was one of the first coalition soldiers to arrive at Kandahar (long before the conventional folks) in Sept '01, God bless those who operate in the dark, on the sharp end and keep the rest of us safe so that we may even entertain lofty ideals like freedom.

[Cameraguy]

So who's The King of Kings, The Big Kahuna who rules the world? There's various conjecture, but no one really knows. It's unlikely to be anyone you've ever seen or heard of. In the US, it's definitely David Rockefeller, who founded the Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR.) When the Rockefellers visit other countries, they're treated like royal heads of state. In Europe, it would be one of the Rothschilds.

As for my sources, they're too numerous to list. It all started with investigating 9/11. One thing led to another and I became fascinated with finding out what led to 9/11 and how this relates to the future of America. I've actually spent way too much time researching this, even to the detriment of my personal life. But I've always had a fascination with truth and discovering the reality behind the illusion.

For a general overview, I'd recommend:

"How The World Really Works"
http://www.amazon.com/World-Really-Works-Alan-Jones/dp/0964084813/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1197073039&sr=8-1

"The Shadows of Power: The Council on Foreign Relations and the American Decline"
http://www.amazon.com/Shadows-Power-Council-Relations-American/dp/0882791346/ref=pd_bxgy_b_text_b

"The Creature from Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve"
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0912986212/ref=pd_cp_b_3?pf_rd_p=317711001&pf_rd_s=center-41&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=0964084813&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=1Z1J895DSYXPJ6142P7N

Another recently published book I'd highly recommend is "The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism"
http://www.amazon.com/Shock-Doctrine-Rise-Disaster-Capitalism/dp/0805079831/ref=pd_bxgy_b_text_b

And finally, a must-read for every American: "The End of America: Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot"
http://www.amazon.com/End-America-Letter-Warning-Patriot/dp/1933392797/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1197075763&sr=8-1

BTW, in case you think I'm somehow anti-American or against the military, nothing could be further from the truth. My father served in Germany during WWII and I have a nephew at West Point, who was sponsored by Barack Obama.

~CG
 

[Maxx]

John Swinton, former Chief of Staff of the most powerful and prestigious newspaper on earth, The New York Times, when asked to give a toast to the "free press" at the New York Press Club stated:
"There is no such thing, at this date of the world's history, in America, as an independent press. You know it and I know it. There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinion out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job. If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone. The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth; to lie outright; to pervert; to vilify; to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it and what folly is this toasting an independent press? We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes."

But they don't control the internet .... yet. But are they controlling you?


Maxx



changed title of post to match thread

[Donhollio]

Steel building like the World Trade Centre,are build in the same style as your typicial big box store.  Verticle masts of steel columns,and beams to rest the flooring system on.

 The floor joists are same as you see when you put a roof on a big box store. next time you go into one ,look up at the ceiling where it connects to the wall. You will see how little amount of steel really holds the joist on. Theres two bolts that fasten the joist to the horizontal beams. That's it ! If you heat it up the floor will weaken and those bolts will not hold the weight of the entire floor.

[Manny]

I would be inclined to think the WTC had a tad more structural integrity than the local Wal-Mart. 

[Chris]

I have split this thread from the US Dollar Slides thread

[GREGK]

In my opinion 911 was a result of bureaucratic incompetence by numerous Federal agencies. To attribute what happened to a vast conspiracy by these same same people is a joke!

I have observed the F.B.I. "in action" and it doesn't surprise me that they were unable to prevent what happened. They tend to "screw the pooch" on a regular basis ( Waco, Ruby Ridge,spys within it's own agency etc. etc.) It has been my experience that they have the  ability to gather intelligence/information but once it is submitted into the lumbering behemoth that is the F.B.I. it defeats the purpose of obtaining the info to begin with. The " keep your head down and your mouth shut" mentality that resulted after 911 was merely an attempt by them to cover up several instances of " dropping the ball". It may appear sinister but in truth it's simple human nature.

Let's face it people, the current Administration is compiled of a group of people that can't pour piss out of a boot much less mastermind what happened on 911.

[BillyB]

I would be inclined to think the WTC had a tad more structural integrity than the local Wal-Mart. 

WTC is better built than a Walmart. A fire of only a few hundred degrees can take down a Walmart. The fire in the WTC was in the thousands.

The thought that the WTC was taken down by explosives is ridiculous. Osama tried that in 1993 and if Clinton wanted a successful operation, he would have hired professionals along with terrorists. Also the building started to collapse where the plane entered. At time of entry, the explosives would have went off then. If it somehow did not go off from impact or the fire, the radio receiver to pick up the transmitter would have melted and would not be able to go off manually.

The WTC is a unique building since 75% of it's near 400 support columns are external. When the airliners entered the building, it sheared off the columns of an entire side and I'm sure it damaged severely or sheared the few columns in the center. A fire alone wouldn't have taken out the WTC. An airliner impact alone cutting support columns would not take out the WTC but a combination would.

I know everybody, especially at the forums, are experts. I'm not an expert at demo by explosives but I am an expert at making love so that makes me qualified to comment on all subjects. I actually do demo of buildings with heavy equipment but I still did my own research looking at both sides of the argument. Most experts agree through studies that the WTC was not an inside job.

CG, I read some of the reviews of the book you say is a must read. The author isn't fair and doesn't blame Hillary for problems as she does Bush. From your perspective, Hillary is in the same super secret society as Bush and should be just as guilty for all the problems Bush is responsible for. Here are a few comments from people who read the book and although I suspect their Republicans, they have a point that the author is bias towards Bush and doesn't appropriate criticism fairly.

This book borders on pure silliness. The author is simply a left-wing Bush-hater and she makes that perfectly clear. Her claims are almost imbecilic. The book is so bad, in fact, that I'm glad that I didn't buy it. I found a copy that someone left on a park bench. Apparently the original owner didn't value it very much.

The author, who has absolutely no credentials as an historian or in any other field related to the subject matter of her book, shows an absolute total ignorance of our history and world history in general. She tries hard to construct what she claims are the steps that always take place in a country that shifts towards dictatorship. Oddly, she misses one of the steps that anyone who has studied the subject even superficially is aware of and that is that such nations invariably band and confiscate. That has happened in virtually ever single case of a country shifting to a dictatorship. Being left-wing to the extreme, she probably just ignored that step because it probably doesn't fit her preconceived notions. Either that or she didn't even do basic research on her subject. Basically, she simply hates Bush and she makes a pathetic and idiotic attempt based on no real knowledge of history or politics to prove that Bush is trying to become a dictator. She completely ignores the historical context of the times and the challenges we face as well as similar periods of our history. Her historical ignorance is sublime and breathtaking in scope. When a television interviewer pointed out that she has no credentials for writing such a book, she defended herself by claiming that the founding fathers wanted "regular" people to defend the constitution ignoring the obvious fact that those who write "authoritative" books on a subject should at least know the subject they are writing about. The author actually tried to make it sound like her ignorance was a virtue!

It's strange how these books never get written during Democratic administrations. Naomi Wolf pretends to know the dynamics of what makes a healthy democracy but what comes off here is more liberal condemnation for conservative Republican (Bush) administration. There's a lot of fancy linguistic reasoning here but it all comes down to a sophomoric attempt to paint President Bush as a tyrant.

Naomi Wolf has quite obviously drunk the Koolaid and would like you to get drunk on it too.



CG, I have also read positive reviews of this book but how can you soundly support it when the author doesn't rip on the liberals in the super secret society as much as she does conservatives. You have implied they're all in it together except Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich.

[Maxx]

BillyB I got to defend CamaraGuy on this one. He does not advocate for either the Republicans or Democrats. He is just giving you information that you can selectively pick out what is useful or informative. He is not partisan and he like I have no affection for either party. IMO they are two doors leading to the same room. 

[BillyB]

He does not advocate for either the Republicans or Democrats.

I know CG is not an advocate for either of those parties as they are both in on it together. That is why I'm questioning him on why he supports a bias book that can't see the the same things he sees about the Democrats.

[Cameraguy]

Billy, you're so caught up in politics and partisanship that I'm not sure you'll ever be able to see the light. Would it make you feel better if I told you that I was voting for a Republican for president in '08? To look at 61 book reviews that average four-and-a-half stars and quote the most damning and partisan one that you could find is disappointing. Whether you want to admit it or not, the fact is that every one of the 10 steps historically used by dictators like Hitler, Stalin and Mussolini to aggregate power and shut down a free society have been implemented by THIS administration against ALL Americans.

Here are the three most recent reviews. I've bolded a few lines in the second one that are particularly pertinent:

***** "The Price of Liberty Is Eternal Vigilance", September 3, 2007
By Concerned Citizen "AG" (Seattle, Washington) - See all my reviews
I have never written a recommendation for Amazon but this book truly warrants the effort.

Among the first lessons the author drives home is that democracy is NOT a spectator sport. The founders did not envisage a country in which the "professionals -- lawyers, scholars, activists, politicians -- politicians -- [should] worry about understanding the Constitution and protecting our rights." As Wolf says, "... the founders did not mean for powerful men and women faraway from the citizens... to protect freedom. They meant for us to do it."

They also certainly didn't consider democracy to be the natural "God-given" order in which civilization conducted itself by. Rather tyranny and oppression were the status quo and liberty was the exception, something to be fought for and clung to for dear life if obtained.

Mrs. Wolf then lists the calculus that all dictators employ to aggregate power: "Invoke an external and internal threat; develop the paramilitary force; create a secret prison system; surveil ordinary citizens; arbitrarily detain and released them; harass citizens' groups; target writers, entertainers, and other key individuals for dissenting; intimidate the press; recast dissent as "treason" and criticism as "espionage"; and eventually subvert the rule of law."

I give credit to Mrs. Wolf for acknowledging that the United States does not parallel past soon-to-be dictatorships such as Italy in 1922 or Germany in 1933. She correctly acknowledges the dis-similarities. Although critics will likely disagree, she handles the disturbing parallels between the past and present.

Importantly, the author also acknowledges that the shift to dictatorship does not happened suddenly and starkly. Many times, normal daily life is unaffected for most of the population, we can still watch American idol and go to the mall and order pizza, all while our liberties are crumbling away around us.

A remarkable aspect of this book was the amount of research conducted. Time and time again, the author inserts chilling similarities between past and present i.e. past propaganda mimicking the "Mission Accomplished" aircraft carrier landing.

As a word of warning, those who cannot turn the magnifying lens used to examine those other nations of the past and the present that are so often criticized, upon their own nation, leaders, and actions, this book will come as quite a shock. There's little that can be done about this -- those who subscribe to the, "we" are the forces of good and "they" are never ending evil, Manichaean worldview will not digest this book easily much to their detriment.

Overall, I think The End of America is a superb read and will recommend it to my friends and family. For further reading, I'd suggest Chalmers Johnson's Nemesis or blogger Arthur Silber.

***** Informative, troubling message, September 17, 2007
By D. T. - See all my reviews
I was thoroughly frightened by the content of this book, and truly hope others are as well. The path we are headed down in this country should be concerning to both Democrats and Republicans. Loss of our liberties will, after all, affect all of us. I would urge anyone who reads this to keep an open mind, and not immediately discard the message she is conveying simply because it focuses on troubling things being done by the current administration. These things would be troubling no matter which party the president belonged to. Being able to take a step back from blind party allegiance to actually see when there is a problem is a key factor in maintaining a healthy democracy. No leader deserves our blind allegiance, regardless of their political party affiliation. Our elected leaders should be accountable to us, not the other way around.

***** Calling All Patriots, September 13, 2007
By T. Bracco "poetic power" (New York) - See all my reviews
Americans have sadly taken democracy for granted. The author of this book sends a necessary letter of warning to get Americans to realize that the continuation of democracy depends on the participation and action of citizens. Ms. Wolf's book identifies 10 steps that have historically been used to shut down open societies and how those steps are currently being taken in our nation today. If you are thinking that sounds harsh, this book will surprise you with its research, argument and facts. If you've been feeling in recent years that something is just not right, Ms. Wolf cites historical examples and recent newspaper articles to demonstrate why you are sensing an erosion of rights and justice. This is a brave book and I applaud Ms. Wolf for caring enough about our country to write it. The American people have now been warned that our democracy is more delicate than we think. Time will tell if collectively people care enough to respond in a way that prevents the "fascist shift" Wolf outlines in this shocking new book.

http://www.amazon.com/End-America-Letter-Warning-Patriot/dp/1933392797/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1197075763&sr=8-1

~CG

[Cameraguy]

Billy, yesterday was the 66th anniversary of Pearl Harbor. Many historians now say that FDR (a Democrat) and his war advisors without a doubt had advance knowledge of the attack on Pearl Harbor and even provoked Japan into attacking:

"On November 25, 1941 Japan’s Admiral Yamamoto sent a radio message to the group of Japanese warships that would attack Pearl Harbor on December 7. Newly released naval records prove that from November 17 to 25 the United States Navy intercepted eighty-three messages that Yamamoto sent to his carriers. Part of the November 25 message read: “…the task force, keeping its movements strictly secret and maintaining close guard against submarines and aircraft, shall advance into Hawaiian waters, and upon the very opening of hostilities shall attack the main force of the United States fleet in Hawaii and deal it a mortal blow…”

According to Robert Stinnett, author of Simon & Schuster’s "Day Of Deceit", we have the proof. Stinnett’s book is dedicated to Congressman John Moss, the author of America’s Freedom of Information Act. According to Stinnett, the answers to the mysteries of Pearl Harbor can be found in the extraordinary number of documents he was able to attain through Freedom of Information Act requests. Cable after cable of decryptions, scores of military messages that America was intercepting, clearly showed that Japanese ships were preparing for war and heading straight for Hawaii. Stinnett, an author, journalist, and World War II veteran, spent sixteen years delving into the National Archives. He poured over more than 200,000 documents, and conducted dozens of interviews. This meticulous research led Stinnet to a firmly held conclusion: FDR knew."

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

"...everything that the Japanese were planning to do was known to the United States..." ARMY BOARD, 1944

http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/6315/pearl.html

Churchill wrote in his Nobel Prize winning series on WWII that FDR knew about the Japanese plans to attack Pearl Harbor. The following is from pages 602-603 of THE GRAND ALLIANCE, c1950. Churchill makes these points about his good friend and colleague FDR, accusing him of treason while knowing that the facts would eventually come out:

Hawaii's commanders did not get proper warning.
Churchill was not going to judge what FDR did at Pearl Harbor.
FDR and he were very afraid that the US could not come into the war unless Japan attacked the U.S.
Pearl Harbor was worth the price.
FDR "knew the full and immediate purpose" of the Japanese at Pearl Harbor.
FDR welcomed the attack.
And this amazing statement: "Nor must we allow the account in detail of diplomatic interchanges to portray Japan as an injured innocent..." That is an admission, granted forced by the facts, that Japan WAS the injured innocent, maneuvered into firing the first shot, as Secretary of War Stimson put it. Cabinet Minister Sir Oliver Lyttelton, expressed the same point on June 20, 1944, to the American Chamber of Commerce: "Japan was provoked into attacking the Americans at Pearl Harbor. It is a travesty on history ever to say that America was forced into the war. Everyone knows where American sympathies were. It is incorrect to say that America was ever truly neutral even before America came into the war on a fighting basis." - See PH VERDICT OF HISTORY, Prange, pp 39-40.

http://www.geocities.com/mark_willey/fdrknew.html

As many have noted (including the neocons who wrote the PNAC planning document), 9/11 is the "New Pearl Harbor."

~CG