The "CIA"-controlled mass media through their fictional TV, radio programs and movies like to subtly foreshadow particular political or social events of the future. They are able to do this because both are scripted and premeditated in advance to occur, either through paid conscious agents or surreptitious methods, such as hypnotism, psychotropic drugs etc. When a united cabal owns and controls the entire political, economic, educational and corporate entertainment/media system, then it is not too difficult to embed and plan the future beforehand. One of the most famous examples is the 1962 film "The Manchurian Candidate" and its apparent parallels to Lee Harvey Oswald's involvement in the Kennedy assassination in 1963 as a 'brain-washed' experiment. (MKULTRA-Sydney Gottlieb). Another odd correspondence between "fact and fiction" was when ABC premiered the TV movie pilot "The Greatest American Hero" on March 18, 1981, the name of the main character being Ralph Hinkley. Then around two weeks later on March 30th the media erupted with the story that President Ronald Reagan was fired upon courtesy of John Hinckley.
Another repetitive trend of the last 10 years leading up to the election of President Obama was the appearance of African-American men casted as President in various TV shows or films. The most popular one was Fox's 24 which premiered in 2001. For the first five seasons actor Dennis Haybert played Democratic President David Palmer. Haybert's portrayal of an African-American president had such an impact that the actor himself even felt that his role helped Americans become "comfortable" with the idea. Political commentators even referred to Obama's election as the "Palmer Effect".
Compelling evidence that the future is revealed in the mass media before it manifests itself, was exposed in the NBC show "The West Wing". There were striking similarities between the shows 2006 season "election" and the actual 2008 U.S. Presidential election. Jimmy Smits played Matt Santos, a young minority Democratic candidate who is pitted against an aging "maverick" Senator named Arnold Vinick(Alan Alda). Santos is telegenic and a popular forty-something with two young children. An "inspirational speaker" he announces his candidacy by telling supporters: "I am here to tell you that hope is real. In a life of trial, in a world of challenges, hope is real." Sound familiar anyone? I suppose if the writers had the crowd shout "Yes we can!" it would be too obvious. His "opponent" is Arnold Vinick, a white-haired Senator(McCain) with a reputation for declaring "straight talk" to the press. Even the vice-presidential picks are similar: the Democrat selects a Washington veteran, while the Republican chooses a staunchly evangelical governor to shore up the base. President Obama likes the music of Bob Dylan and "coincidentally" so does Matt Santos in the show. When the press starts asking where Vinick attends church, he tells his staff "I haven't gone to church for a while." Asked in July 2008 by the NY Times about his church attendance, McCain said: "Not as often as I should." In Britain, where the series remains popular in syndication the newspaper The Telegraph declared: "Barack Obama will win: It's all in The West Wing."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/30/arts/television/30wing.html?_r=2&em=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print
Another odd strand of synchronicity began on April 4, 2007 with the leading news story of "shock-jock" Don Imus being castigated for describing the University of Rutger's women's basketball team as "ho's." For about two straight weeks on the local and national media outlets this silliness was the major news item dwarfing everything else as the nation followed the saga of Imus apologizing and being fired. During the ongoing continuous coverage of this "news", on April 14 the Hawaiian-American pop-singer Don Ho, famous for his hit "Tiny Bubbles"(#8Billboard, 1966) passed away. Then on April 16th, the culmination of "ho" coincidences transpired when Seung-Hui Cho, a South Korean student at Virginia Tech went on a shooting rampage killing 32 people and himself.
And to top it all, in November 2001 the hip-hop group "The Coup" released their album "Party Music". The intended, original CD cover art, created in June 2001 depicts the WTC Twin Towers exploding, months before the 9-11 "Islamic terrorist attacks".
PARANOID? Read posts about UFOs & ETs, Suppressed Science & Hidden History, Secret Societies & the New World Order, Politics, Armageddon & the Apocalypse... From the CIA to the NSA, the FBI to the DEA, and all the other alphabet soup agencies. (Graphic by Don Grabau)
Search This Blog, All Links Referenced In All Posts, & Paranoid Links At The Bottom Of The Page
Showing posts with label 911. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 911. Show all posts
14 March, 2009
06 February, 2009
Was America Attacked by Muslims on 9/11?
David Ray Griffin
Was America Attacked by Muslims on 9/11?
Highlights
An NBC “deep background” report in 2008 pointed out an additional problem: KSM and the other al-Qaeda leaders had been subjected to “enhanced interrogation techniques,” i.e., torture, and it is now widely acknowledged that statements elicited by torture lack credibility. “At least four of the operatives whose interrogation figured in the 9/11 Commission Report,” this NBC report pointed out, “have claimed that they told interrogators critical information as a way to stop being “-tortured.’” NBC then quoted Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, as saying: “Most people look at the 9/11 Commission Report as a trusted historical document. If their conclusions were supported by information gained from torture, . . . their conclusions are suspect.”
This FBI report leaves only two possible explanations for Ted Olson’s story: Either he made it up or else he, like Deena Burnett and several others, was duped. In either case, the story about Barbara Olson’s calls, with their reports of hijackers taking over Flight 77, was based on deception.
The opening section of The 9/11 Commission Report is entitled “Inside the Four Flights.” The information contained in this section is based almost entirely on the reported phone calls. But if the reported calls were faked, we have no idea what happened inside these planes. Insofar as the idea that the planes were taken over by hijackers who looked “Middle Eastern,” even “Islamic,” has been based on the reported calls, this idea is groundless.
Was America attacked by Muslims on 911?
http://davidraygriffin.com/articles/was-america-attacked-by-muslims-on-911/
Much of America’s foreign policy since 9/11 has been based on the assumption that it was attacked by Muslims on that day. This assumption was used, most prominently, to justify the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. It is now widely agreed that the use of 9/11 as a basis for attacking Iraq was illegitimate: none of the hijackers were Iraqis, there was no working relation between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, and Iraq was not behind the anthrax attacks. But it is still widely believed that the US attack on Afghanistan was justified. For example, the New York Times, while referring to the US attack on Iraq as a “war of choice,” calls the battle in Afghanistan a “war of necessity.” Time magazine has dubbed it “the right war.” And Barack Obama says that one reason to wind down our involvement in Iraq is to have the troops and resources to “go after the people in Afghanistan who actually attacked us on 9/11.”
The assumption that America was attacked by Muslims on 9/11 also lies behind the widespread perception of Islam as an inherently violent religion and therefore of Muslims as guilty until proven innocent. This perception surely contributed to attempts to portray Obama as a Muslim, which was lampooned by a controversial cartoon on the July 21, 2008, cover of The New Yorker.
As could be illustrated by reference to many other post-9/11 developments, including as spying, torture, extraordinary rendition, military tribunals, America’s new doctrine of preemptive war, and its enormous increase in military spending, the assumption that the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were attacked by Muslim hijackers has had enormous negative consequences for both international and domestic issues.
Is it conceivable that this assumption might be false? Insofar as Americans and Canadians would say “No,” they would express their belief that this assumption is not merely an “assumption” but is instead based on strong evidence. When actually examined, however, the proffered evidence turns out to be remarkably weak. I will illustrate this point by means of 16 questions.
Continue reading at:
http://davidraygriffin.com/articles/was-america-attacked-by-muslims-on-911/
Was America Attacked by Muslims on 9/11?
Highlights
An NBC “deep background” report in 2008 pointed out an additional problem: KSM and the other al-Qaeda leaders had been subjected to “enhanced interrogation techniques,” i.e., torture, and it is now widely acknowledged that statements elicited by torture lack credibility. “At least four of the operatives whose interrogation figured in the 9/11 Commission Report,” this NBC report pointed out, “have claimed that they told interrogators critical information as a way to stop being “-tortured.’” NBC then quoted Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, as saying: “Most people look at the 9/11 Commission Report as a trusted historical document. If their conclusions were supported by information gained from torture, . . . their conclusions are suspect.”
This FBI report leaves only two possible explanations for Ted Olson’s story: Either he made it up or else he, like Deena Burnett and several others, was duped. In either case, the story about Barbara Olson’s calls, with their reports of hijackers taking over Flight 77, was based on deception.
The opening section of The 9/11 Commission Report is entitled “Inside the Four Flights.” The information contained in this section is based almost entirely on the reported phone calls. But if the reported calls were faked, we have no idea what happened inside these planes. Insofar as the idea that the planes were taken over by hijackers who looked “Middle Eastern,” even “Islamic,” has been based on the reported calls, this idea is groundless.
Was America attacked by Muslims on 911?
http://davidraygriffin.com/articles/was-america-attacked-by-muslims-on-911/
Much of America’s foreign policy since 9/11 has been based on the assumption that it was attacked by Muslims on that day. This assumption was used, most prominently, to justify the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. It is now widely agreed that the use of 9/11 as a basis for attacking Iraq was illegitimate: none of the hijackers were Iraqis, there was no working relation between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, and Iraq was not behind the anthrax attacks. But it is still widely believed that the US attack on Afghanistan was justified. For example, the New York Times, while referring to the US attack on Iraq as a “war of choice,” calls the battle in Afghanistan a “war of necessity.” Time magazine has dubbed it “the right war.” And Barack Obama says that one reason to wind down our involvement in Iraq is to have the troops and resources to “go after the people in Afghanistan who actually attacked us on 9/11.”
The assumption that America was attacked by Muslims on 9/11 also lies behind the widespread perception of Islam as an inherently violent religion and therefore of Muslims as guilty until proven innocent. This perception surely contributed to attempts to portray Obama as a Muslim, which was lampooned by a controversial cartoon on the July 21, 2008, cover of The New Yorker.
As could be illustrated by reference to many other post-9/11 developments, including as spying, torture, extraordinary rendition, military tribunals, America’s new doctrine of preemptive war, and its enormous increase in military spending, the assumption that the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were attacked by Muslim hijackers has had enormous negative consequences for both international and domestic issues.
Is it conceivable that this assumption might be false? Insofar as Americans and Canadians would say “No,” they would express their belief that this assumption is not merely an “assumption” but is instead based on strong evidence. When actually examined, however, the proffered evidence turns out to be remarkably weak. I will illustrate this point by means of 16 questions.
Continue reading at:
http://davidraygriffin.com/articles/was-america-attacked-by-muslims-on-911/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)