It is a proven fact, established by great Americans, godlike in their patriotism, that the foundation of all the war crimes was the destruction of the WTC by government-trained radioactive beavers with adamantium teeth, who were released into the ducts of WTC by Marvin Bush himself and who chewed through the supports!

If Alternet and Common Dreams did their duty as alternative media; you would be doing this story. There are pictures of the radioactive beavers out there! There are released CIA memos regarding experiments with mutant animal technology going back to the 50s! Anyone who can add two and two and, like myself, get it right with no more than two tries realizes this!

What is putting pressure on you Ms. Rosen? Are you afraid the beavers will eat the foundations the buildings in which you live? You can email me at pfspaghettiforbrains@area51isreal.com is you think I'm full of it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I wouldn't be making silly appearances on the television or flying around the world contributing to more global warming. Instead, I'd just eat all day and sleep and turn the White House into something kool and messy as my apartment. Congress and the White House are too lazy to investigate the Bush folks anyway.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The United States has criticized Japan and Turkey for denying their war crimes, and punished numerous foreign nationals for committing them. Our Neocon 2.0 president, however, acknowleges them, shrugs them off as if they were mere breaches of etiquette, and grants immunity to the perpetrators.

The devious General Hayden, liable under the UCMJ because he authorized war crimes while in uniform, claims that the torture memos merely define "the outer limit to which Americans will go." He doesn't explain how 40 or more detainee deaths were ruled homicide by military pathologists, a fact which would make him--along with Bush, Cheney and a number of government lawyers, CIA officers and doctors--guilty of felony murder.

It's clear that nothing is going to be done. Obama talks about torturers and murderers as dedicated public servants doing their duty in good faith and breaches a clear affirmative duty to prosecute under the UN Convention on Torture, which is also US law, and his oath of office (in both the original constitutional and John Roberts versions). His obstruction of justice makes him an accessory after the fact to these crimes.

I wonder if Michelle Obama is still proud of her country? And what would the Reverend Wright say?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obama will have a short shelf life abroad unless he stands up for justice ...

Already at home those that care are beginning to lose faith in Obama ...

Read Naomi Klein's : The Lexicon of Hope ...

And a dedication for all you crushed Obama supporters ...

The Thrill is Gone

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

...only he speaks better and still says nothing of substance.

I hope those of your who swallowed the Obama Kool-Aide platitudes are now realizing that this man is a corporate whore, bought and paid for by corporate pimps.

He has done little to be proud of on the progressive front and worse yet, he does not know what he stands for...say what you want about the Shrub and company...at least you knew what they stood for and what they were going to do to this country.

Obama, on the other hand acts like a wimp and tries to play nice, while they are eating his lunch.

Until people realize that this is a war for the heart and soul for this country and should be fought as such, the neoconazis will win, hands down. THEY do know how to fight.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

All through the Bush/Cheney presidency, Bush was held accountable for a total of...nothing! What makes anyone think that's going to change now that he is out of office?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

While much attention is given now as to 2 persons given obscene levels of 'waterboarding', what about the other forms of torture and abusive beheaviors upon most terror suspects. That done by 3rd parties for us by renditions, the way accused terror suspects were transported with diapers on and strapped on platforms for many hours, hit and assulted by guards, verbal assults as to their race, religion and family.
We also can't forget that almost all Americans in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 pretty much gave mass approval to the President and still give it to Pres. Obama as to torture and abuse of terror suspects. The masses never believe anyone that did horrible things to us should be treated humanly. Look at our attitudes as to especially the Japanese in comparison to the Nazis in and after WWII or our attitudes to anyone who was a 'Communist'. Things don't change - only the group of people to be attacked are.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I think Obama has, in his mind, justified to himself what he has done. When Nixon had to leave office disgraced, he had his former Vice President take over, to pardon him. This time the situation is a little different, but the idea still amounts to "well, yeah, the guy and his Administration did terrible things, but now it's time to move on, it's a "new day", let's not get "bogged down".

All this, of course, is to assure the continuity in power of those who really run the country: the rich elite.

Still, voting for Obama, IMO, was the best we could do in the circumstances. Now we've got to work from here. But it is we, the people, who are going to change things, if anything is going to be changed. The puppets will, generally speaking, do as they are told by their corporate bosses, unless we put them in a position where they have no choice but to actually do something honest.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

One of the defendants at the Nurenberg trials condemned the proceedings when he said that the victors always determine what is or is not a war crime, the implication being that had Hitler won the War, it would have been the Allies on the dock. Apparently, Hitler has won the War on Terror. We cannot allow Bush, et al. to escape unpunished. The eyes of the world and our national history are at stake. Even if we do not prosecute the minions who claim they were just following orders, we must proceed with administration of justice against those at the top who made the decisions to torture. If Obama is not willing to risk the ire of the congressional minority, his attorney-general must do his duty and honor our Constitution, our laws, and international laws and treaties to which we are signatories -- including the Geneva Conventions.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I couldn't agree more with your feelings and your analysis. If Obama and Congress don't follow through, then we open the door for future national leaders to carry out the same immoral policies that Bush and Cheney put in place. I, for one, will have completely lost faith in the country if this happened.

All I can say to those who posted disagreements with you is to remember your basic catechism: two wrongs don't make a right. It's tough to maintain high standards and morality, but if any country can do it, I think the U.S. has the strength to do it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It the President of the United States is to refuse to bring to justice all those who have committed crimes against the State and against humanity in these last terrible years, our prison doors should be thrown wide open to allow those guilty of far lesser offences to also go free.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

nope, have a nice day

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I would much prefer to see the shadowy puppeteers tried & prosecuted than the asshole puppet Bush...but America has to start somewhere; and soon! Seeing Bush/Cheney proven to be traitors and "high crimes" conspirators would do wonders for America's image around the world...and make me a lot happier! The numerous 'war crimes' were just follow-ups to the crime of the century, the murder & betrayal perpetrated by members of our own government on Sept. 11, 2001. Hang 'em HIGH!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

little georgie was but a bit player.

When you wish to get honest you'll want to confront all of shrub's handlers and auxiliary crew members of the cabal of criminality.

Larry Silverstein heads the parade of diabolic players.
When you come back w/the answer as to why the CEO/weasel from Cantor Fitzgerald was in London on 9/11 - you'll have made a wonderful contribution, until then bush is but a distraction.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Let's not forget that fully 1/3rd and perhaps even as much as 48% of the people in this country voted consistently for Republicans/neocons. Bush may have stolen both elections but that was because they were close enough to steal. It is necessary for that large percent of our population to be educated about what actually happened under the neocons, how they violated the law and acted to destroy the Constitution and you can only do that by shining the light on the past, by holding them accountable. For the health of this country in the future, the light has to be shown into that dark world that was the Bush Administration so that in 10-20 years the same thing won't happen all over again.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

However, I believe that as seemingly small stuff emerges from various corners of what was an 8 year fraternity party turned tragic there will be no choice but to act on each of them. Collectivly it will become overwhelming leaving the current administration no choice but to do its job. By that time they will be lined up to spill their guts, trying to cut deals to avoid going to jail. The Republicans are self destructing and can't re-invent themselves until they clean house. It's a painfule process but in the end it's to our advantage to let this happen. When the risk of covering someone else's butt becomes greater than the reward, it's over. Let's be patient. Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

saying that in order for us to remove sanctions on Cuba, that Cuba must 1: release ALL political prisoners and 2: PROSECUTE ALL WHO WERE INVOLVED IN TORTURE.
Now my question is this. How can any official of the United States, from the President on down, stand in front of the people with a straight FACE, demanding ANYTHING of ANYONE that the U.S. is not willing to do ITSELF?
OUR leaders are not willing to hold ANYONE HERE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY CRIME, NO MATTER HOW HEINOUS.
WHY? Because Obama still holds out the HOPE that if he lets the worst of the worst criminals off the hook that he still might convince a few of his Republican adversaries in Congress to help him out with a vote now and then. For that VERY REMOTE possibility, he would ignore The Constitution, The Geneva Convention, The Law, Decency, The Will Of The Majority Of The American People, Illegal Wire Tapping, Over 900 lies about Iraq, The lies still going around about Iran, The Risk of Nuclear War with Russia, Pakistan, or Korea, and more, while those same Republicans Obama HOPES to "win over" spit on him at every opportunity and whine about stupid things like shaking hands with someone they don't like. At least he didn't come back saying he "looked into Chavez's eyes and saw his SOUL" and he now KNOWS he's a GOOD MAN.
We can't hold everyone ELSE to a higher standard than we hold OURSELVES. And we can't just decide that a criminal can only be prosecuted if he/she is not in your own peer group. The way it is now is the more harm you cause, the more people you hurt or even kill, the more you harm this country, the less likely it is YOU will ever be brought to justice. Unless you mess with someone with more clout than YOU, like Madoff. He must have ripped off the wrong person. The rest are still pulling in the money with the blessings of congress and the President.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The president and the Whitehouse should not be involved in the decision as to which crimes are investigated and which aren't. That should never be a political decision. To bring such things into the political arena is to be guilty of obstruction of justice. This matter is a criminal matter and must be handled by the criminal justice system just as other criminal cases are handled. No political association at all is required. The whole idea of "looking forward and not back" has no meaning whatsoever in this context. I submit that it is not the within the president's legal mandate to decide who is prosecuted and who isn't.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

are a nation, culture, based on justice and decency our criminal justice system should handle it. But getting someone of authority to get off their ass and pursue prosecution is the problem. I guess when some american citizen is tortured, our country will either be hypocritical on the world stage, or just let bygones be bygones. C'mon lazy amerkins, get off your ass.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

At least in theory. If any one thing is the core of the American nation, it's this fact. The bushies, with their flouting of our laws, and trampling of that "goddam piece of paper", the Constitution, have succeeded in rending our nation asunder and damaging it nearly as much as the Civil War did. These are major capital crimes, I'm talking about, folks, crimes NONE of the rest of us would get away with. Why the exception for the bushies? What do they hold over the Obama administration? It seems Eric Holder is ready and willing to begin prosecution of the worst criminals ever to disgrace their offices. What's really happening here? Are we a nation of laws or not? Without respect for and enforcement of our laws, we're NOTHING.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Whats Obama, but the leader of the executive.

He's not, the one to prosecute, prosecute.

Thats the job, of the judicial per the consti-tu-tion.

Here's the facts: It isn't UP to Obama, whether Bush and Cheney and company are investigated for torture. Nor Congress. It isn't their job.

The JUDICIAL branch, are the ones that we should be putting the pressure on, not Obama. They need to put them on TRIAL (Not a "congressional investigation").

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

DEAR MR. PRESIDENT I HAVE BEEN A FAN SINCE YOU WERE IN MY TOWN FOR THE DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION AND FROM THE MOMENT YOU CAME OUT ON THAT STAGE I KNEW I SAW SOMEONE WITH THE IT FACTOR. NOW THAT YOU HAVE ACHIEVED WHAT YOU SET OUT TO DO WHY DONT YOU DO JUSTICE FOR THE CRIMINAL GOP THAT RAN THE COUNTRY THE LAST EIGHT YEARS AND KEPT US IN FEAR. YOU NOW HAVE THE CHANCE TO PROSECUTE BUSH AND CHENEY, STAND UP AND BE A MAN AND THROW THOSE WAR CRIMINALS TO THE HAGUE, OR EVEN TO A NICE TEXAS JAIL JUST DO IT

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

, but the fact remains until we have a comprehensive un-biased re-investigation of 911 the issue will be as divisive to Americans as the controversial Viet Nam war.

You look backward in a rowboat to move forward, and as a pundit so aptly said tonight you don't prosecute/investigate future deeds, you look back to find wrong doing.

It's as simple as that, folks. We can't move into a better future unless we hold to account those who messed up our past.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

'In fact why were one million people dead and injured and a few million people forced to leave their homeland? Why were hundreds of billions of dollars worth of damage inflicted on the Iraqi people and hundreds of billions of dollars of costs for the military invasion imposed on the American people and America's allies? Was attacking Iraq not orchestrated by the Zionists and their allies in the previous ruling government of America which was on the one hand in power and on the other the owner of arms manufacturing companies?'

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

All former President Bush's life, he has had people come in and clean up his mistakes, messes,an other general mishaps without him blinking an eye. He assumes it will happen and it has happened. This poor excuse of a person, let alone a president, finally needs to be held accountable for the past eight years of thinking he is above the law. The world is questioning whether we have the spine to stand up and do what is right, or will we just let this one go for fear of how embarrassing it will be for us to hold a president accountable for the crimes he is sanctioned during his tenure as president.

We need to bring former Vice-President Cheney, probably the mastermind of this debacle along with Rumsfeld, and the lawyers who wrote opinions that allowed these criminals to think they could write into law that breaking our laws and the laws of the international community could be justified and covered just because they said so. We need to stop this from ever happening again and if we just look ahead and forgive these fools, without any punishments whatsoever, it will allow future presidents and officials to think that they will not be held accountable as well. It has to stop now. We need to be the ones to finally clean up after Bush's messes for the last and final time, this time holding him responsible and accountable for his crimes. Perhaps, some prison time would finally wipe that cocky smirk off his face.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I have been critical of Mr. Bush on these pages, but now I've got to give the guy some credit. I thought he would leave office spreading pardons far and wide. But he didn't do it. I assume that he didn't do it because he thought that no one in his administration was guilty of anything.

But now it appears that there are criminal offenses that were committed during Mr. Bush's tenure. His not issuing pardons enables us to investigate, and, if necessary, prosecute the bad guys.

So two cheers for Mr. Bush. I wish I could have given him more, but his eight years of a disastrous administration gives me pause.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I can't believe so few pundits seem to have caught on to what Obama is up to. He's a better politician than Clinton. Instead of taking the reins and immediately calling for a thorough-going investigation of the Bushies, including George's brain, Dick Cheney, Barack decided to ignore calls for what might appear partisan retribution. First, he stonewalled (as did Nixon, but in another context, amounting to obstruction of justice). Barack was simply waiting on the now-apparent groundswell of support for criminal review.

He may have chosen Holder with this in mind from the git go. He figured that when MSNBC and the left, aided by security reviews and reporting in such journals as the NYT, stirred up a frenzy of support for anything designed to hold the culprits accountable, Holder, as legal eagle in chief, would have to act. Now, Holder may be waiting on the likes of Feinstein to do the ground-laying, and when public opinion is marshalled to a shout for justice, a special prosecutor will be chosen.

This person should not come from the ranks of political hacks or even for that matter legal circles; better that he be a retired senator or even a lay person, a figure with impeccable credentials and a reputation for non-partisan fairness. It is a shame Archibald Cox is gone. Had he not been selected to be a Mideastern envoy, George Mitchell would have been a superb choice.

But mark you, Obama will bring it all about with no room for any claim he's played a role in it. We have not had as shrewd a politician as this since LBJ. (I didn't say as honest a politician; I mean someone who knows how to work around anything that might hurt himself politically.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

George: Hey Dick, I got this great idea for getting into Afghanistan without raising suspicion.

Dick: Really Mr President!

George: Getting angry. Listen cock sucker, I may act like a fuckin’ moron, but that’s only to fool the public.

Dick: I’m sorry. What did you have in mind?

George: We pulverise a big building and pin the blame on someone else.

Dick: Ok! Sounds good! And how do you propose we do that?

George: Easy, we get someone to fly a plane into a tall building. The fuel will catch fire and vaporise it.

Dick: Oh really? And where are we going to find someone stupid enough to fly a plane into a building?

CIA Advisor: Er, with all due respect Mr President, a skyscraper has never collapsed simply due to a plane flying into it.

George: Well why don’t you ask that mate of yours – what’s his name – Bin Laden - to persuade some of his lackeys to do it? They’re all a bunch of bleedin’ fanatics after all.

CIA: Well, we could give it a try, but what’s in it for them?

George: How the fuck should I know? Given them a motive.

CIA: I’ll do my best, but as I just said, the likelihood of a building collapsing simply because a plane flies into it will only damage it, not pulverise it. I mean to say, suppose a plane flew into the Pentagon for example. You wouldn’t expect that to collapse would you? It would just make a hole. The actual structure of the building would remain intact, even though it may have suffered colossal damage.

George: In that case, we’d need to, er, help it on its way – pack it full of explosives, just like they do in a controlled demolition.

Dick: Oh brilliant. And how are we supposed to fill a big busy building with explosives without attracting attention? And how on earth would we set them off without attracting attention?

CIA: Er, well, it so happens that the World Trade Centre would be ideally suited for such a purpose.

George: The World Trade Centre? You’re shitting me.

CIA: Well, as you know WTC1 and 2 are huge, huge buildings. In fact, the whole of the WTC complex covers 18 acres would you believe, that’s about 9 football pitches give or take. Now, you’re not gonna believe this, but underneath that lot, there is enough space to hold the Empire State Building.

Because the buildings are so huge and so wide, there are any number of secret elevators that no one else knows about, and which can be reached via underground tunnels. Therefore, all the explosives we need can secretly be positioned in all the right places without anyone ever knowing it has happened.

Now, as you know, if you look at pictures of WTC1 and 2, their external appearance is a series of vertical columns, so if you blew up the base, the buildings would simply slide into the hole underneath, and it would not be at all obvious that this was happening. Therefore, if a plane were flown into the building, and later on, after loads of smoke had been generated, explosives were detonated at strategic places inside the building, the effect would be of a collapse of the building.

However, anyone watching the tower collapse would notice the bottom of the building moving downwards in unison with the top of the building, an observation that could only lead to the conclusion that the whole of the building was actually sliding into an enormous hole.

Dick: Well, that’s very interesting, but why on earth should anyone design a building like that?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

CIA: Well, Rockefeller was no slouch. The WTC was his brainchild which he got built back in the 60s not long after the Treaty of Rome was signed in the late 50s, and with it the introduction of the bastard bloody euro. This was a direct attack on the dollar, and he reckoned that sooner or later, countries like Iraq, Iran and N Korea would one day start trading oil in euros rather than dollars.

George: So?

CIA: Well, he reasoned that one day, US would need to go in there and take back what’s been taken from us, so we blow up a big building, pin the blame on some hapless bleedin Arab, and get out there. That cunt Sadam’s now trading in euros, you want the Taliban out so we can build Unocal’s pipeline, plus we need to get the opium fields up to speed, as the Taliban have been doing their level best to wipe them out.

Dick: Ok, so we somehow get Bin Laden to persuade his henchman to commit suicide. Suppose they fly the plane into a different building by mistake? Besides, the FAA would never permit a plane to get within 50 miles of New York.

George: Ok smart arse, no planes, we just blow the buildings up.

CIA: Well, there is another alternative.

Dick: Like what?

CIA: Er, well, don’t laugh, we only pretend there’s a plane in the sky.

George: Ha! Ha! Very funny. You fuckin’ idiot. Of course there has to be real plane in the sky. For God’s sake, it will be seen coming over the horizon, and it will be seen gradually approaching the city. People will watch the plane. And as it gets closer to the city, they’ll start saying things like ‘oh my God, that plane that I have been watching in the sky for the past several minutes is going to fly into the World Trade Centre.

CIA: Well actually Mr President, you’re wrong. People never consciously watch planes flying in the sky. They will only notice after the event.

Dick: So, what’s this alternative idea of yours?

CIA: Ok, you’ve all seen Godzilla, the mighty dinosaur trapped in the streets of New York, terrorising the neighbourhood, and not even the entire military could destroy it.

George: Oh Jeez, that was scary. I didn’t dare go into New York after seeing that. In fact, I couldn’t even see the end of the film, it upset me so much to think of all those innocent people getting slaughtered by it.

CIA: Actually Mr President, there wasn’t really a monster walking the streets of New York, it was all pretend. It was just made to look as if there was a monster there.

George: Really, you gotta be kidding me. And I suppose Father Christmas doesn’t exist either

CIA: That is also the case, at least the version you see on Christmas cards is just a fantasy.

George: And now I suppose you’re going to tell me that God doesn’t exist.

CIA: Well, that’s a tricky one. But let me put it this way. The people who brought us the Bible also believed the earth was flat, around which orbited the sun. However, we now know from our satellite pictures that the earth is in fact a round ball which, believe it or not, actually orbits the sun.

George: Ok, that’s common knowledge.

CIA: But it wasn’t then. Christianity is founded on the Jewish religion. And where is the heart of the Jewish religion located? Israel of course. It’s no accident that some of the richest and most powerful families in the world are Jewish – the Rockefellers and Rothschilds. Some of our most prolific movie makers are Jewish – Stephen Spielberg for example; plus there is a very powerful Jewish lobby here in the US that acts on behalf of Israel’s interests.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

George: Great, so you think that we can in some way overlay the WTC exploding with a carefully synchronised image of an aircraft careering into it. And how on earth will we get the collusion of the media?

CIA: We don’t need their collusion. Constructing the image will be child’s play. In order to broadcast it to the nation, we construct a TV transmission station in its own building, WTC7 for example, and at the appropriate moment, we switch to our broadcast. Plus, we will be in the best place to set off the explosives at the right moment.

George: So, let me get this right. If there are no planes, then there will nothing for the FAA to intercept. Won’t they get suspicious?

CIA: No, not really. We’ll set up loads of war games, so that on the day in question, everyone will be too busy playing them, plus all our fighters will be far away. We create a huge explosion near the top of the building, broadcast our version of the event to the world, and have a field day as millions of people spend the next 10 years figuring out what really happened.

Besides, there will be so much smoke generated, that no one will be able to see what really happened.

George: Better still, why not have 2 buildings blown up.

CIA: That could be a bit tricky. Everyone’s eyes will be on the sky after the first explosion and by that time, we will have the full attention of the whole world.

Apart from that, 2 buildings sounds goods. No one will see the first ‘plane’ fly into the building, and we have to convince the world it’s a terrorist attack. A 2nd plane will nail it.

George: Plus, as soon as it happens, everyone’s going to blame me and think it’s an inside job, espeCIA:lly after we’ve invaded Afghanistan and then Iraq.

Dick: Ok then. On the day in question, we can film you reading a story about goats to a bunch of school kids in Florida.

George: That’s great. Then people will know I had nothing to do with it.

Dick: Yes, but you must never tell people in public that you saw the first plane go into the North Tower. It is supposed to be a surprise.

George: Oh come on Man, I’m not that stupid.

CIA: Well even if you do, it won’t make any difference. The American public are so fuckin’ stupid, they’ll believe any crap we throw at them.

Dick: Yeh. We begin by demonising Bin Laden straight away, even though most people have never heard of him. There’s a Microsoft news bulletin. 9 hours after the event, we can inform all its users that Bin Laden had already denied it.

CIA: That’s right. And then we can saturate the media with nothing but stuff about what a shit arse Osama Bin Laden is. It makes a nice anagram of Sane Bad Oilman.

George: Plus we can have it happen on September 11th which is 911 the emergency number so people don’t forget.

CIA: Now, few if any people will actually film the first tower exploding, but lots of people will film the 2nd explosion. At some point in time, we will release video of the first explosion that will have been taken accidentally by some group. It doesn’t matter who. When this video is first released, the object going into the building won’t be too clear, and some people may even think it’s a missile of some sort.

But eventually, we will re-release this video, only this time the plane will be perfectly clear and unmistakeable.

As regards the 2nd plane going into the south tower, this is tricky. Our biggest problem is if the hijackers get overpowered, or the plane does get intercepted, or worse, it actually flies into another building. This final scenario could be catastrophic for us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

CIA: Therefore, actually having a real plane is really not on the cards. However, we will create images taken from different vantage points that show without doubt a plane flying into the 2nd building.

We will also keep a very careful eye on the Internet, and should any video be taken that departs from the offiCIAl story, well those videos will not be around for too long. Besides, no one will believe them.

Dick: So, let me get this straight. We secretly pack WTC1 and 2 with powerful explosive that will absolutely ensure the buildings blow up and slide into a bloody great big hole. We use WTC7 to broadcast all the images we want the public to see. There will be so much smoke generated that it will be absolutely impossible for anyone to see whether or not a real plane flew into WTC2, but the whole media will show it, and just like Father Christmas and Godzilla, people will see what their eyes want them to see.

CIA: Oh, and finally, we detonate WTC7 the same way, thereby getting rid of all the evidence, plus a whole lot of other incriminating stuff like Enron and God knows what else.

Dick: But won’t people be puzzled by the lack of any substantial rubble?

CIA: No! Besides, we’ll get it all cleared up and shipped off to China before you can say ‘Osama here we come’

Dick: And can we leave it to you to generate a whole pile of crap of hijackers boarding 4 planes who overcome the passengers, and the FBI finding all the incriminating evidence?

CIA: Child’s play. We do it all the time.

George Great! See you both next week.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]