BUY THIS PRODUCTS FROM AMAZON.COM HERE
✅ Printed in the USA
✅ High-quality
✅ Order at amazon.com
ANDIEZ Social Worker Wheel of Emotions Just Like Children Emotions Heal When They are Heard and Validated Poster
But whereas Hitler was a true master of propaganda, and his minister a far less talented functionary, today the situation is reversed: our propaganda minister is the master, and our leader his functionary. Karl Rove is so confident of his strategy that he now announces it to the public! In January of this year,
Rove noted that we face “a ruthless enemy” and “need a commander in chief and a Congress who understand the nature of the threat and the gravity of the moment America finds itself in.”
Here’s more:
“[T]he people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.”
— Karl Rove (oops!) Hermann Goering
COMMENT #148 [Permalink]… Plunger said on 5/16/2006 @ 4:04 pm PT…
Every single mainstream media talking head has stated:
“if you look closely – you can see the “Nose Cone” of the aircraft entering the scene from the right.”
All of them said “Nose Cone”
All of them.
What are the odds?
COMMENT #149 [Permalink]… Robert Lockwood Mills said on 5/16/2006 @ 4:12 pm PT…
For Cyteria: Bob, I have to disagree with you. Brad’s credibility isn’t at stake here. Rev. Griffin’s speech at Madison spelled out a strong case that the Bush administration at least knew about the 9/11 attack beforehand, if not complicit in it. As far as I know, Rev. Griffin’s argument has not been refuted.
The physical evidence and the testimony from engineering experts (including the Brigham Young professor) support Rev. Griffin. It isn’t enough to say, “I believe the government.” Not when that government has proven itself to be a liar on numerous occasions before and since 9/11.
COMMENT #150 [Permalink]… Ari said on 5/16/2006 @ 4:22 pm PT…
http://www.Prisonplanet…./110804factsstraight.Htm
This is just one website that I found on the matter of Flight 77, within a minute or two of searching on Google. I can’t say I know much about the source, so I can’t 100% guarantee he’s not lying … But then again, where can you do that on the Internet?
The most important point the link makes is that there is no shortage of eyewitnesses who saw a plane flying very low towards the Pentagon that day (it’s a shame those eyewitnesses aren’t given more exposure to put to rest ridiculous theories). Just as telling is the claim that there have been no eyewitnesses who identified a missile … There were just people who likened the plane, metaphorically, to a missile as it neared its final trajectory.
Furthermore, if one were to look further into the damage done to the building, one would find that there is evidence of a collision of the wings with the lower floors of the building. I’m afraid I don’t have a link handy, but 5-10 minutes of searching should turn up a website with pictures of the lower floors (they do exist) showing significant external damage. Why did they not tear holes in the walls? Well, aircraft wings are not particularly bulky, and my guess is that they were constructed as a hollow shell, like the wind turbine blades I work with. While the wing is intact, is can bear heavy aerodynamic loads quite well. However, like a coke can with a dent on its side, an unusual impact, like against a steel-reinforced concrete structure, can leave it crumpled and shattered. The fuselage, however, can do significantly more damage because it consists of significantly more mass and has the hardest portion of the plane on its underside (in addition to producing an explosion from its stored fuel). The damage done to the Pentagon building, supposedly 16ft in diameter, would fit with the size of the fuselage … Roughly 12ft (trunk diameter of a 757 is 3.76 meters). Regarding the notion that more of the building should have fallen apart, and that 4 rings of the Pentagon would be too much for the plane to penetrate, I’ll just say that I don’t know the details of the Pentagon’s construction, and neither do you, and neither do your sources on the Internet … But to me as an engineer, it seems plenty plausible.
I see some people writing that the image in the video is a missile, but I fail to see how they can claim that from the fuzzy footage. That they don’t discern the wings is almost meaningless, considering that the wings are very narrow and do not project visibly from the plane body at the angle shown.
Really, the silliest thing about the missile theory is that we have definitive proof that the WTC buildings were struck by 757 airplanes. In the absence of REAL evidence of a missile strike, or something else other than a 757 striking the Pentagon, and with consideration of the missing flight and passengers, and the evidence we have for a plane strike (however faulty it may be), the clearly logical conclusion is that it is vastly most likely that flight 77 hit the pentagon.
There may be some significant details about a botched response to the events of 911, or about a failure to adequately guard against it, or about the abuse of mishandling of evidence and footage surrounding the events … Those issues are fine and productive to explore, and if you think there’s been government abuses/failures there, I’m all for listening to you, because I don’t trust this administration either. However, this “Inside Job” crap just makes its proponents and everyone they’re associated with look bad when they actually take up a cause with some merit.
COMMENT #151 [Permalink
Visit our Social Network: Pinterest, Blogger, and see more at our collection.
