Conspiracy theory FAQ, part 1

When confronted with hard evidence showing government complicity into the september 11th attacks, debunkers and other such apologists will forward a great variety of a-priori arguments that release them from the need to confront this wide ranging body of proof (which would result in uncomfortable cognitive dissonance). The vast majority of these statements generally turn out to have little merit, showing themselves as nothing more than a petty cop-out for a moral coward. Some of the more atypical claims will be featured in this post, and discussed at length to judge their value. Any postings following this one will deal with the remaining pseudo-skeptic arguments, which have more or less been resolved years ago by other members of the truth movement.
 
The purpose of this series is simply to provide the truth seeker with ready-made ammunition which he can use to fend off the lame a-priori dismissals, and force the opposition to actually look at the evidence that has been amassed. This includes the multiple warning of an impending terrorist attack (which were ignored by bush), the war games and live hijacking drill that obstructed the air defense, and the financial arrangement that took advantage of the chaos, especially the black eagle trust. Anyone who looks at the events of 911 with a half open mind will see that there are terrible flaws with the official story, and a huge number of anomalys that hint not of some garden variety terrorist plot, but a state crime against democracy. First up are two denials that are frequently bandied about on wikipedia.
 
    
Red flags that should prompt extra caution include surprising or apparently important claims not covered by multiple mainstream sources.
 
Just because someone says a claim is extraordinary does not make it so. People often label any theories that are contrary to the governments version of events as 'extraordinary', thus implying that the government and its associated media have a monopoly on what is considered reasonable. But claims can only be considered extraordinary if they have no historical precedent. Therefore, all that is needed to show that a theory can be confirmed (with ordinary scientific processes) is to point out a similar case that has happened before. For this, a simple look at the geopolitical affairs of the 1930s will suffice. In a period of just 8 years, the world saw 4 separate false flag attacks (!) used by authoritarian regimes to push their agendas: This includes the manchurian incident, the clash of wal wal, operation himmler, and the shelling of mainila. These incidents are not at all disputed by historians (at least, not by historians who live outside of the implicated nations, where the temptation to white wash history is present): No one has difficulty believing that such crimes could be perpetrated by a mere historical artifact, which they have no personal connection to. The same is not true when ones own nation has been accused of authoring a terrorist attack in the present!

 

Supposing that we even have a free media to begin with...


 

Claims that are contradicted by the prevailing view within the relevant community, or that would significantly alter mainstream assumptions, especially in science, medicine, history, politics, and biographies of living people. This is especially true when proponents say there is a conspiracy to silence them.

 

This criterion might be excusable for an online dictionary that isn't interested in the hidden truth, but its blatantly unacceptable for everything else. It feeds into the larger mind set that establishment types have, with their belief that history is something which cannot be shaped by conscious intent, via the persistent influence of the fog of war or other such mystical phenomenon. They have a characteristic ambivalence towards the notion that much of modern history has been the result of elaborate policys put into place by powerful oligarchs, something which would upset their fragile egos (and the illusions they have about democracy). These academics condemn all such theorys and hypothesis' with the pejorative label of conspiracism. Bruce cumings elaborates on this belief system: "But if conspiracies exist, they rarely move history; they make a difference at the margins from time to time, but with the unforeseen consequences of a logic outside the control of their authors: and this is what is wrong with 'conspiracy theory.' History is moved by the broad forces and large structures of human collectivities."

  

But power corrupts, and all power corrupts absolutely. The two go inextricably hand in hand, and we may ask these men what barriers can stop a dominant entity from utilising secrecy to implement its policys: Answering this question without contradicting historical records would be quite a feat. That is because any country which becomes a superpower in its specific ficton will eventually wind up playing host to a cast of authoritarian misfits, who use their influence and wealth take control of the national agenda. Humans are social creatures, and the desire to conform to the default viewpoint is a built in feature. When information is distributed to a population in a top down fashion, this makes the entire nation vulnerable to being misled by its leadership caste (whose interests are divorced from those of the common people). Coming out in detraction of the reigning cultures golden cow, therefore, is a difficult and unrewarding task, one which got only more complicated with the advent of nationalism during the industrial era. Countless times have we seen men oppose various ideologies and religions, only to be greeted with viscous persecution by the establishment, whose tenets were later overturned and falsified decades or centurys after the fact.

 
  
Those who claim the WTCs were destroyed via a thermite demolition have ignored the fact that this substance can't inflict real damage to structural members.
  
Assertions like these seek to raise doubt about the validity of a collapse initiated by thermitic materials (which work much more silently than explosives) by claiming their ability to cut or melt steel is very limited. Sketchy though such a catchet may be, after the debut of two separate tests done by national geographic and mythbusters, the 911 debunkers seized upon it with a vigour that is rarely seen outside of a funny farm. They were able to get quite alot of mileage out of this ploy, and things were working out nicely. Soon, they even grew bold enough to dismiss actual patents that were designed to cut steel columns, saying things: 'Anyone can make a patent, but that doesn't mean it exists or even works!' But as any good gambler will tell you, if you play an empty hand for long enough, eventually, someone at the table will call your bluff. In late 2010, jonathan cole (a graduate from the university of connecticut) would release a video which blew this facile hoax out of the water.
 

   



   

By using something he called 'a thermitic box cutter', the civil engineer was able to slice through a steel I-beam with only 2 lbs of thermite, thus confirming the nature of the work being carried out at the combustion institute since the 1960s. The beam in coles video appeared to be a W 6 x 16, with a known weight of 16 pounds per linear foot. His results are consistent with the estimates made by NIST, who insisted that 'approximately 0.13 lb of thermite would be needed to heat and melt each pound of steel.' So with a large box column weighing approximately 1500 pounds per linear foot, the amount of thermite required to make the cut may be around 187 lbs. However, additing sulfur to the mix will slightly decrease the total amount of thermite needed, and also produce a cooler reaction byproduct (since it takes advantage of the eutectic phenomenon).

 
Watch:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g


Why would they use thermite which cuts steel without announcing it, then switch to explosives? To tip people off?
  
The unasked question here is just how big and how loud would a potential demolition charge need to be? According to mark hightower, severing a large core column would require either 90 lbs of tamped RDX, or a 53 lbs shaped charge (with 18.5 lbs of RDX). Scientists from NIST, however, allege that: '...Even the smallest explosive charge that was capable of bringing down the critical column in the building, had it occurred, we would have seen sound levels of 120 to 130 dbs, a half a mile away.' And again, because the WTCs were going to demolished in front of a live television audience (which entailed huge risks for the perpetrators), their collapse would need to be brought about in a highly unconventional manner, so as to perpetuate the notion that impact + fires were responsible. This demanded removing most of the typical giveaways to a controlled demolition, such as the obvious, sequential explosions, collapse initiated from the bottom, a small rubble footprint, etc. This arrangement would have also had to proceed in total secrecy, with the explosive and pyrotechnic devices installed in a manner that would protect them from aircraft debris and fires (no small feat even for members of the military industrial complex!).
 
Given these requirements, the best way to destroy the twin towers was to use a two stage demolition process. The first stage would involve silently cutting all (or nearly all) of the 16 large and 31 small core columns on the floors impacted by the planes. This is a task to which thermitic box cutters are well suited towards. Arranged in banks of perhaps 10-12 per corner (and 47 per floor) of the building, they could be set off in a precision sequence via radio repeaters safely installed into reinforced crevices. And though thermite burns with a ferocious intensity that is capable of melting any thickness of steel, the noise they emit is entirely insignificant, at least compared to the explosive charges needed to sever a large core column. Ignited hundreds of feet above street level, there would have been little sign of the box cutters deadly presence, aside from the pool of molten steel flowing away from WTC 2 before its collapse (which may have been the result of a premature ignition from a thermite bank). With the core columns cut on multiple levels, the impact floors were suddenly robbed of their structural integrity, and would effectively cave in on themselves, setting the upper section of the towers into motion against everything beneath it.
   

Imagine a dump truck colliding with a sand berm
at 100 kmh, multiplied by 5 orders of magnitude

  

The second stage would ensue shortly after the first, taking advantage of a collapse that converted a tremendous amount of gravitational energy into kinetic energy, resulting in an extremely destructive interaction that pulverised concrete and crumpled steel members. Left to its own devices, however, this piledriver effect would (probably) not be able to produce a global collapse: Everything above the 92nd floor of WTC 1 -and the 77th floor of WTC 2- would cease to exist, and many, many floors beneath them would be gutted by falling debris. But the lower foundations would remain fully intact, as would the core and perimeter columns all the way up to the impact site. The buildings would be preserved by immense networks of interconnected steel beams and columns. Thus, in order to guarantee a total collapse, these resistance points needed to be broken with explosive charges. Under the cover provided by the noise and dust of the gravity collapse, the second stage of demolition could proceed unnoticed to anyone more than a block away from the site (though some blasts can be heard further, depending on how the echo was funneled through the streets). With just a handful of explosive charges placed on all the floors beneath the impact site -probably hidden inside elevator shafts- the twin towers last structural redoubts would be methodically smashed from the top down.

 
 
How would they be able to plant enough thermite/explosives to perfectly raze these mammoth buildings, without anyone taking notice beforehand?
    
This is much less of a problem when you have operatives in control of security at the WTC complex, as jerome hauer and brian jenkins of kroll associates were. These men had a plethora of suspicious connections to the 911 crime ring, and it may have fallen upon them to provide secure working spaces for demolition crews. The best way to proceed with such an operation is to conceal all suspicious equipment inside ordinary tool boxes, move them up through express elevators, and only bring them out when working in confined spaces or on empty floors. This is the method through which the 59 story citicorp building was secretly retrofitted in 1974 over the course of several months, without either the tenants, media, or general public catching on. Maintaining secrecy is not especially difficult, especially if wireless detonators are used instead of blasting cord. These would need to have scramblers to ensure they aren't accidentally set off by cell phones, though.
  
As for the actual logistic of rigging up the twin towers, this depends on the exact method thats being used to destroy them. A 2 stage demolition process (like the one mentioned previously) would require cutting all 47 core columns on at least two separate floors. Thats a total of 94 thermite charges per building, enough to destroy everything above the impact zone. A single charge would be attached to each column, then covered beneath a protective casing. Below these floors, a different approach would be needed. Rather than going after the core columns, it would be easier to rig up the column junctures in the elevator shafts, of which there are four to a floor. If this was done all the way from the impact floors to street level, then that amounts to 368 charges for WTC 1 and 308 charges for WTC 2 (not including the 94 thermite charges). Working with these numbers, its possible to determine roughly how many man hours were required.
 

One of the web joists (not quite

the same as a column juncture)

   
Watch:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3EQV223Y-M
 
 
If the WTCs really were destroyed by a controlled demolition, most of the worlds architects and engineers would have come forward and raised hell with the authoritys!
 
This is obviously not the case. An in-depth examination of the scientific literature regarding the twin towers collapses reveals that virtually none of them are based on a close observation of the visual archives. They are abstract mathematical models which use random assumptions to come to conclusions about factor x or y. Such insular processes are effectively divorced from reality, and tell a truth seeker very little about what happened to these 110 story structures: Someone who does not understand the unique features of this collapse (or posses an affinity for regression analysis) will have NO ABILITY to determine whether or not CD played a role. Academic institutes of all shapes and sizes, ranging from NIST to AE911Truth, have been guilty of a systemic failure to observe the actual behaviour of the twin towers (and building 7) prior to and during their collapse. They perpetuate a false dichotomy of progressive collapse vs controlled demolition, failing to come to terms with the peripheral issues that could falsify their case.
 
They proceed with an obvious confirmation bias in mind, neglecting to consider that the truth may lie somewhere in between their pre-determined conclusions. AE911Truth is responsible for disseminating the false notion that steel framed buildings cannot experience a global collapse without the aid of explosives. NIST is responsible for grossly distorting the mechanical forces acting on the WTCs, and for failing to document the material flow that defined each destruction event. The basic standards of the scientific method have been discarded in favour of abstract models and poor observations, which in turn were regurgitated to the public in the form of sound bytes via the mass media. If there was ever a time when the 'experts' should have stepped in to straighten things out, this was it. Sadly, that is not what actually happened. On both sides, negligence fed by false confidence has snowballed into something that is now labelled as 'professional dialogue regarding the WTCs collapse', which has now been framed into an issue concerning only whether explosives were present or not!
 
 
If the attacks truly were orchestrated by the government, someone would have talked! Even if all of the conspirators had kept silent, there must have been dozens of people on the sidelines who knew, and they couldn't ALL have been assassinated!
    
That is correct. If anything, there may have been well in excess of a hundred people who knew sensitive details about the september 11th attacks, weeks or months before they actually took place. At a lower level, like when the feds were monitoring terrorist activity in 2000-2001, some CIA and FBI agents actually did catch wind of the plot, and tried to warn their superiors. The storys of harry samit, susan lindauer, kenneth williams, and sibel edmonds are just a few examples of this. Debunkers may argue that this is only a niche example which doesn't invalidate their wider point. Again, they are right. It goes without saying that the proof for MIHOP is invariably more circumstantial than that which exists for LIHOP. In a situation oddly reminiscent of the fermi paradox, no one has come forward to release information that directly reveals preperations of the scale predicted by most truth advocates (I.E, no rigging of the WTCs with bombs, no modifications of jumbo jets for remote control, etc). Could absence of evidence be taken as evidence of absence? Unfortunately, no. New counter-intelligence techniques devised in the 1960s have given the CIA and other agencys a strong ability to suppress whistle blowers, via trauma based operant conditioning. As soon as a potential leaker is identified, they will be subjected to extensive background checks, and placed under very intrusive surveillance in order to gain personal information from them.
 
Many technologys are available to spying agencys nowadays, including laser microphones, phone tapping, computer bugging, etc. All sources of communication are surveyed constantly by the highest technology available and a great deal of the results are recorded, auto-transcribed and processed by computer to show statistical associations (some of which goes to a live ear if close spying is underway). Once enough information has been assembled to create a 'criminal profile', the director in charge will make a decision as to the best approach needed to gain the whistle blowers compliance. This sometimes involves black-mail and bribery. More often, however, a campaign of terror is waged against the individual, where they are subjected to constant and unrelenting harassment, raising their stress level to an intolerable level that not only destroys their sense of security, but interferes with normal sleep and work related activities. Through weeks of gang stalking, the whistle blowers daily routine will be irreparably damaged, and their sanity will be stretched to the breaking point. Sometimes, the aim of this harassment campaign is to get the individual to release their information in a partial or disorderly manner, where it can be picked apart and discredited by cointelpro assets. Mostly, however, they are given a chance to end the torment by accepting a list of conditions which they must abide by, on the threat of instantaneous retaliation (in proportion to the severity of their infraction) if they do not.

 
  

If our government was capable of masterminding the 911 attacks to justify an invasion of afghanistan, then why didn't they plant WMDs in iraq?
 
Because it reinforces the comforting illusion of incompetence, and allows their political system to perpetuate itself. To determine whether or not the US government is incompetent, you only need to look at what policys they have enacted in the last decade. Notice that there is always a difference between what officials say they will do, and what they actually do. When an institute persists in taking a course of action which does not fulfil its agenda, we might posit that they show signs of incompetence. However, when they do not stop pursuing that agenda even at (what seems to be) a huge loss to themselves, there really are only two possible explanations. One answer is raised by albert einstein: "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting different results." A more sinister answer comes from stefan molyneux: "If an organization seems to be continually failing to achieve its stated mission – but refuses to alter its actions – then clearly it is simply achieving another, unstated mission." With this one single insight, all of the odditys associated with the global war on terror (as well as the war on drugs, poverty, etc) can be reconciled. For every official proclamation a government agency may make regarding some ambitious new campaign, there will almost invariably be an unofficial motive that is not being disclosed to the public.
   
So to truly judge an agencys competence, we need to know not just their intent, but their actual motives. When taking into account all of its secret sponsors and policy decisions, the bush administration is seen for what it really is: A neoconservative platform that was successfully able to institute most of the goals outlined in the project for a new american century. And since their propensity for using mission statements to conceal more unwholesome goals is widely known among the worlds top intellectuals, we need to call into question the unstated premise of the debunker argument: If the US actually had staged the 'discovery' of these weapons in a transparent attempt to justify their needless war of aggression (in violation of the united nations charter), it would only serve as an enormous jolt to intellectuals across the world, and help push them into a stance of direct opposition to the united states. So, would soothing the conscience of the unwashed masses be worth the cost of alienating the politically awake? No. And again, the purpose of the false WMD scare was not to give a legitimate justification for invading iraq, or any other nation in the middle east (thats what they had 911 for): The point was only to get the neocons foot in the door.
 
Afterwards, a continual presence in iraqs vast oil fields could be maintained through mission creep, and vigorous stigmatisation of those officials who wanted to 'cut and run.' Even the president himself was not above participating in this heavy handed bullying, using his rank to pressure dissenters into compliance. In summary, the key to explaining the iraq episode is the fact that people are much more willing to believe in an incompetent government, rather than one which is deliberately malevolent. But once you accept the premise that the bush administration is a highly effective, morally corrupt association, and that their actual goals in any endevour are never what they publicly claim, it becomes clear that 'incompetence' is nothing more than a comforting charade which is used to cloak evil policys in. The men in office are able to get a surprising amount of mileage out of this little trick, since american citizens have a very high tolerance for political failure, although not with silly hot topic issues pertaining to sexual orientation, gender, religion, or race. Incompetence also lends itself to perpetuating the left-right slave paradigm, particularly when opposition partys gain browny points by pointing out the obvious, and saying how much better things would be if the current president was kicked out of office (to be swiftly replaced by their own candidate, of course...).
  
*edit made oct 30, 2013.

Warlords of the american empire

A list of personnel from the US army special operations command (USASOC), the go-to branch of irregular warfighters for neocon leaders in the throes of americas drunken, post-911 rampage. The identitys of this organisations leadership caste are not easy to discern, as there is no centralised database for such inquirys, and there are very few published articles that will mention more than one or two of these officials at any time.

Mir bahmanyars book on the US rangers is one rare example. By and large, though, all these names must be painstakingly tracked down, with hundreds of man hours put in to get tangible results. Its clear that there is a degree of secrecy present even in simple tier-two units... Anyone who wanted to get hold of a personnel roster for these organisations would be faced with a black hole, especially regarding those leaders who served during the sensitive period of the 90s.

The list assembled here is now several months old, and was going to be kept private (in the interest of not drawing unwanted attention from the national security apparatus), but current developments have made this level of caution unnecessary. Civil disobedience is on the rise, happily, and the illusion of government authority is slowly beginning to erode. This post is simply another small step in undermining the authoritarian police state that has seized hold of western democracys.

Note: The tenure durations listed below are generally accurate to within a month or so, but in some cases, information is so sparse that only the year in which the leader served is known. For the 19th and 20th SFGs (and 4th psyop groups sub-units) in particular, there is no public data available on the commanding officers at all! This list has many gaps present, and needs to be vetted by individuals with extensive knowledge of americas special operations members.

USASOC hierarchy: Three of the units depicted here
(on the right of the graph) did not come into existence
until after the war on terror was declared in 2001

Commander, 4th psychological operations group
Colonel Christopher St. John: Aug 1999 - July 2001.
Colonel James A. Treadwell: Aug 2001 - June 2003.
Colonel Jack N. Summe: July 2003 - June 2005.
Colonel Kenneth A. Turner: July 2005 - June 2007.
Colonel Curtis D. Boyd: July 2007 -  Aug 2009.
Colonel Carl E. Phillips: Aug 2009 - Dec 2012.

  
Commander, 75th ranger regiment
Colonel Stanley A McChrystal: June 1997 - July 1999.
Colonel P.K Keen: Aug 1999 - July 2000.
Colonel Joseph L. Votel: July 2001 - Aug 2003.
Colonel James C. Nixon: Aug 2003 - June 2005.
Colonel Paul J. LaCamera: July 2005 - July 2007.
Colonel Richard D. Clarke: Aug 2007 - Aug 2009.
Colonel Michael E. Kurilla: Sept 2009 - Aug 2011.

1st ranger battalion commanders
Lieutenant colonel S.G Hoogland: June 1997 - Aug 1998.
Lieutenant colonel Joseph L. Votel: Aug 1998 - July 2000.
Lieutenant colonel Tony Thomas: July 2000 – July 2002.
Lieutenant colonel Michael M. Kershaw: July 2002 - July 2004.
Lieutenant colonel Richard D. Clarke: Aug 2004 - Aug 2006.
Lieutenant colonel Brian Mennes: July 2008 - Feb 2010.

2nd ranger battalion commander
Lieutenant colonel Stanley A. McChrystal: Nov 1994 - June 1996.
Lieutenant colonel J.M Bednarck: June 1996 - June 1998.
Lieutenant colonel M.C Okita: June 1998 - June 2000.
Lieutenant colonel Kevin C. Owens: June 2000 - June 2002.
Lieutenant colonel Jeffrey L. Bailey: June 2002 - June 2004.
Lieutenant colonel David B Haight: June 2004 - July 2006.

3rd ranger battalion commander
Lieutenant colonel M.J Ferriter: July 1996 - July 1998.
Lieutenant colonel D.B Allyn: July 1998- June 2000.
Lieutenant colonel J.C Nixon: June 2000 - June 2001.
Lieutenant colonel S.J Banach: June 2001 - June 2003.
Lieutenant colonel Paul J. LaCamera: June 2003 - July 2004.
Lieutenant colonel J.G Castles: July 2004 - July 2006.
Lieutenant colonel Daniel R. Walrath: July 2008 - Feb 2010.

   
Commander, 160th special operations aviation regiment (SOAR)
Colonel Bryan D. Brown: 1993 - 1994.
Colonel Dell D. Dailey: 1994 - 1996.
Colonel Richard A. Cody: 1996 - 1997.
Colonel Howard W. Yellen: 1997 - 1999.
Colonel Richard B. Bowman: 1999 - 2001.
Colonel Richard L. Polczynski: 2001 - 2003.
Colonel Andrew N. Milani: 2003 - 2005.
Colonel Kevin W. Mangum: May 2005 - May 2008.
Colonel Clayton M. Hutmacher: May 2008 - June 2011.

1st battalion, 160th SOAR commander
Lieutenant colonel Clayton M. Hutmacher: July 2006 - May 2008.
Lieutenant colonel Van J. Voorhees Jr: May 2008 - May 2009.
Lieutenant colonel Allan Pepin: May 2009 - May 2011.
Lieutenant colonel Mike Hertzendorf: May 2011 - 201?.

2nd battalion, 160th SOAR commander
Lieutenant colonel John R. Evans: June 2006 – June 2008.
Lieutenant colonel Thomas R. Drew: June 2008 - 20??.

3rd battalion, 160th SOAR commander
Lieutenant colonel Walter Rugen: Aug 2007 - June 2009.
Lieutenant colonel Kirk E. Keepers: June 2009 – May 2011.

4th battalion, 160th SOAR commander (activated in 2008)
Lieutenant colonel James C. Dugan: Nov 2007 - July 2008.
Lieutenant colonel Mike Hertzendorf: July 2008 - July 2010.
Lieutenant colonel Heath Niemi: July 2010 - July 2012.


Commander of JFK special warfare center and school
Major general William F. Garrison: 1995 - 1996.
Major general William P. Tangney: 1997 (May 1996?) - Mar 1998.
Lieutenant general Kenneth R. Bowra: Mar 1998 - Mar 2000.
Major general William G. Boykin: 2001 (?) - 2003.
Major general Geoffrey C. Lambert: 2003 - 2004.
Major general James W. Parker: 2006 - June 2008.
Major general Thomas R. Csrnko: June 2008 - Aug 2010.
Major general Bennet S. Sacolick: Aug 2010 - 201?.

Deputy commander of JFK special warfare center and school
Brigadier general Hector E. Pagan: 2007 - 2008.
Brigadier general Bennet S. Sacolick: 2008 - 2010.
Colonel Ferdinand Irizarry: 2010 - 201?.


Commander of US army special forces command, USASFC ('Green Berets')
Major general William P. Tangney: May 1995 - May 1996.
Major general Kenneth R. Bowra: May 1996 - Mar 1998.
Brigadier general Frank J. Toney: May 2000 - Sept 2001.
Major general Geoffrey C. Lambert: Sept 2001 - May 2003.
Brigadier general Gary M. Jones: May 2003 - Sept 2005.
Major general John F. Mulholland: Sept 2005 - July 2006.
Major general Thomas R. Csrnko: July 2006 - July 2008.
Major general Michael S. Repass: July 2008 - July 2010.
Major general Edward M. Reeder Jr: July 2010 - July 2012.

1st special forces group commander
Colonel Russell Howard: 1994 - 1996.
Colonel David P. Fridovich: Aug 2000 - 2002.
Colonel Richard G. Thomas Jr: 200? - Sept 2006.
Colonel Eric P. Wendt: Sept 2006 - July 2008.
Colonel Rand Binford: July 2008 - July 2010.
Colonel Francis Beaudette: July 2010 - June 2012.

3rd special forces group commander
Colonel Mark D. Boyatt: 1995 - 1996.
Colonel Gary M. Jones: 1998 - 2000.
Colonel Philip R. Kensinger: 2000 - 2002.
Colonel Joseph D. Celeski: July 2002 - July 2004.
Colonel Patrick Higgins: July 2004 - Sept 2006.
Colonel Christopher K. Haas: Sept 2006 - July 2008.
Colonel Gus Benton II: July 2008 - July 2010.
Colonel Mark C. Schwartz: July 2010 - July 2012.

5th special forces group commander
Colonel T. M. Carlin: Aug 1995 – Aug 1997.
Colonel D. P. Brownlee: Aug 1997 – July 1999.
Colonel C. W. Paxton: July 1999 – July 2001.
Colonel John F. Mulholland: July 2001 – July 2003.
Colonel H. E. Pagan: July 2003 – July 2005.
Colonel K. McDonnell: July 2005 – July 2007.
Colonel C. E. Conner: July 2007 – Aug 2009.
Colonel M. E. Mitchell: Aug 2009 – Aug 2011.

7th special forces group commander
Colonel Salvatore F. Cambria: - June 2001.
Colonel Peter J. Dillon: June 2001 - July 2003.
Colonel Jeffrey D. Waddell: July 2003 - Aug 2005.
Colonel Edward M. Reeder: Aug 2005 - Dec 2007.
Colonel Sean P. Mulholland: Dec 2007 - May 2009.
Colonel James E. Kraft Jr: May 2009 - July 2011.

10th special forces group commander
Colonel Geoffrey C. Lambert: 1994 -1995.
Colonel Charles T. Cleveland: 2001 - 2003.
Colonel Michael S. Repass: 2003 - Sept 2005.
Colonel Kenneth E. Tovo: Sept 2005 - Jan 2008.
Colonel Darsie D. Rogers, Jr: Jan 2008 - June 2009.
Colonel Sean P. Swindell: June 2009 - 200?.


Now, while this list has so far only detailed the names of commanders within USASOCs sub-units, it would also be prudent to list the identitys of leaders within the USASOC branch itself, as well as its parent organisations like JSOC and SOCOM (seeing as they featured so prominently in the 'war against terrorism'). These individuals have been responsible for perpetrating numerous war crimes, and they need to start getting bad attention from the public!

SOCOM is strictly an administrative organization, while JSOC

is a field branch that decides which units throughout the SOCOM

force structure get called into harms way. It is JSOC that determines

what task force will be established for any given mission role

Commander of the US army special operations command (USASOC)
Lieutenant general J.T Scott: 1996 -1998.
Lieutenant general William P. Tangney: 1998 - 2000(?).
Lieutenant general Bryan D. Brown: Oct 1999 (June 2000?) - Aug 2002.
Lieutenant general Philip R. Kensinger Jr: Aug 2002 - Dec 2005.
Lieutenant general Robert W. Wagner: Dec 2005 - Nov 2008.
Lieutenant general John F. Mulholland: Nov 2008 - July 2012.

Deputy commanding general of USASOC
Brigadier general William P. Tangney: Oct 1994 - May 1995.
Brigadier general Gary M. Jones: 2000 - 2002.
Brigadier general Charles T. Cleveland: 2003.
Brigadier general Mark V. Phelan: May 2005 - July 2006.
*Brigadier general Raymond Palumbo: 2009 - July 2010.
Major general William K. Fuller: July 2010 - 2012.


Commander of the joint special operations command (JSOC)
Major general Peter J. Schoomaker: July 1994 - Aug 1996.
Major general Michael Canavan: Aug 1996 - Aug 1998.
Lieutenant general Bryan D. Brown: 1998 - 200?.
Lieutenant general Dell L. Dailey: 2001 - March 2003.
Lieutenant general Stanley McChrystal: Sept 2003 - June 2008.
Vice admiral William H. McRaven: June 2008 - June 2011.

Deputy commanding general of JSOC
Brigadier general Charles R. Holland: June 1993 - June 1995.
Brigadier general Gregory L. Trebon: July 2000 - Jan 2003.
Brigadier general Lyle M. Koenig Jr: Feb 2003 - Jan 2004.
Brigadier general Raymond P. Palumbo: Sept(?) 2004 - July 2007.

  
Commander of the US special operations command (SOCOM)
General Wayne A. Downing: May 1993 - Feb 1996.
General Henry H. Shelton: Feb 1996 - Sept 1997.
General Peter J. Schoomaker: Nov 1997 - Oct 2000.
General Charles R. Holland: Oct 2000 - Sept 2003.
General Bryan D. Brown: Sept 2003 - July 2007.
Admiral Eric T. Olson: July 2007 - Aug 2011.

Deputy commanding general of SOCOM
Rear admiral Ralph E. Suggs: 1999 - 200?.
Lieutenant general Bryan Brown: Aug 2002- Sept 2003.
Vice admiral Eric T. Olson: 2006.

Military officials implicated in the 911 attacks

In july of 1996, the office of the joint chiefs of staff released a document titled, joint vision 2010, which is defined as "the conceptual template for how we will channel the vitality of our people, and leverage technological opportunities to achieve new levels of effectiveness in joint warfighting." It calls for the achievement of full spectrum dominance as as the primary objective of the US military. Then chairman of the joint chiefs of staff (which is the highest military position in the US hierarchy), general john shalikashvili, stated that JV2010 created an operationally-based model for the evolution of the armed forces, and how to attain success in the chaos of modern warfare. A significant element in this concept was the air forces global reach program, which was headed under the acquisition office of the assistant secretary of the air force. The man in charge of this department was lawrence delaney and his deputys, darleen druyun, and lieutenant general stephen plummer, all of whom were deeply involved in the boeing pentagon tanker lease agreement. After the end of the cold war, the need to keep nuclear forces on constant alert against a soviet first strike, or to base large forces overseas ready to fight world war III became redundant. However, the air forces inherent speed, range, precision, lethality and flexibility was something that gave america what the secretary of the USAF called "global reach, & global power." Thus, a program was created to further develop and refine this quality. Placed under the air forces acquisition department, it was seen to fruition by men like delaney and plummer, as were a number of other research and development branchs, like the office of scientific research, or AFOSR. As it turns out, this facility is located in arlington virginia, the very same city where a group of raytheon engineers were working on the guidance system for the global hawk. A large number of these men ended up being killed in the september 11th attacks, when their aircraft were supposedly hijacked and smashed into famous landmarks. Even more alarming, however, is the presence of a certain brigadier general william hodges. This individual not only has a long history with the global reach program, but also happened to be in command of macdill air force base, which has a number of very suspicious characteristics placing it in the spot light.
 
In addition to being one of the two major military facilitys that were participating in the global guardian exercise that day (from where a number of secret objectives were piggy backed off of), macdill was also undergoing a drill that simulated a hijacked aircraft being rammed into the base, which saw the whole airfield being locked down for three hours. When considering all the evidence which suggests that anything but a boeing 757 hit the pentagon, 911 researchers have then been tasked with the obvious question: Exactly what happened to flight 77? If the contents of the declassified operation northwoods document are anything to go by, then it seems distinctly possible that flight 77 was landed onto the runway of macdill under the cover provided by that simulated plane crash. In this way, perhaps, its passengers could be detained without anyone ever knowing they had not been killed in the pentagon explosion. It is a little known fact that macdill has an extensive tunnel network underneath its foundations, which were constructed at the beginning of the cold war. Many of these have since become flooded, and almost nobody on the base realises their existence. One would also have to take into account the presence of the special operations command, a military administration that winded up leading the nations response to the september 11th atrocitys, and which had as its subordinates such fearsome units as JSOC, and USASOC. The latter organisation features heavily in the ring of persons implicated in this crime. Lieutenant general bryan brown was the leader in charge of the US army special operations command, which was composed of six different mission units, three of which he had previously led before his posting to USASOC. Back in 1993, for example, brown was the commander of the 160th special operations aviation regiment, or SOAR. He and his deputy, colonel dell dailey, worked closely together during operation gothic serpent, which was executed under the direction of major general william garrison. That mission ended in failure after the shoot down of two black hawk helicopters, and the violent battle of mogadishu, which was later popularised in a book by author mark bowden.

Its worth mentioning that garrison, the main architect of this disaster, was a famous green beret and vietnam veteran, as well as an admitted participant in the joint army-CIA venture, code named the phoenix program. This background applys just as much to him as to the other men on his staff, like colonel thomas o'connell (a future raytheon vice-president), or brigadier general william kernan. Despite serving in different units during their vietnam tours, these individuals wartime experience were very similar to one another, particularly in that they helped carry out a program of mass civilian murder. Operation phoenix was responsible for identifying and neutralising all personnel who may have been active in supporting the functioning of the viet cong guerilla army, in one way or another. Actions as innocuous as bartering sacks of rice with a VC affiliate could be sufficient to get someone placed on this hit list! Once targeted, the individual would be subjected either to harassment, intimidation, or capture and torture. Targeted killings were also a frequent punishment. Even decorated units such as the infamous tiger force were not above joining in these vicious persecutions of non-combatants. More than 80,000 vietnamese people were victimised under operation phoenix, with up to a quarter of them being killed. The fact that these despicable actions ended up being perpetrated again in iraq and afghanistan by two former commanders of SOAR hints at the deeply negative impression that william garrisons presence had on that unit... The joint prioritised effects list, or JPEL, is a list of individuals who have presented a nuisance to the occupation forces stationed across the middle east. Although it is commonly believed to only apply within certain high risk areas of afghanistan, this hit list is actually in use across the arab peninsula by agents of the american empire. Kidnappings or assassinations are known to have taken place (though infrequently) outside of the containment areas designated by coalition armys. This shameful reality was exposed to the world in 2010 with the release of 75,000 classified documents from wikileaks.

It was determined that after the JPEL had been authorised by JSOC brass, it was put into action by brigadier general raymond palumbo, who came up with the innovative idea of setting up a death squad in the same fashion as hitlers einsatzgruppen, and stalins NKVD. Of course, back in 1996 when all this brainstorming was taking place, palumbo was just another overly ambitious battalion commander serving with the 160th SOAR. After mr brown was reassigned to deputy command of the 1st infantry division, and colonel dailey was promoted to replace him, a strange master student relationship developed between the two men, which is when the morbid fixation with targeted killings started proliferating amongst the armys special operations. No one ever said that these men lacked imagination. What is beyond dispute, however, is that this group of costumed thugs were responsible for a tremendous amount of collateral damage while operating in afghanistan and iraq. Task force 373 alone is guilty of the deaths of several thousand people during the course of their operational history *, for which a large number of whom there was little or no evidence confirming their sympathys with militant factions. As if that wasn't enough, they were also responsible for calling in the air strike that killed anwar al-awlaki, who, despite his radical islamic background, was a naturalised american citizen. The reason why this is of such importance is that, if the 911 drone swap hypothesis turns out to be true, it means that commercial airliners were being landed at privatized airports, and armed men were on the ground waiting to detain and murder the passengers. If anyone was capable of carrying out such cold blooded crimes on american soil, then the secret operatives of USASOC must definitely rank at the top of the suspect list. Under the influence of psychopaths and war criminals, no military operation planned by them would be ruled out on morale grounds alone... Moving along, dell dailey is also connected to another key player in the terrorist attacks, a man most notable not for what he did, but what he did not do. Michael canavan was a former commander of JSOC, who acted in this role at the same time that general hugh shelton served as the head of SOCOM.

Canavans only other action of note prior to september 11th had been his leading role into the investigation of air force CT-43s crash landing, which killed commerce secretary ron brown. (A good man who was in no way related to bryan brown) Shelton, on the other hand, was a major sponsor of the doctrine advocated in joint vision 2010, and a frequent collaborator of its main author, john shalikashvil, to such an extent that shelton was even nominated to succeed the chairman after his term had expired... Upon retiring from the military in 2003, shelton would later come out with a tell all autobiography, which offered a host of candid exposes on the unsavoury actions of american officials during the lead up to the war on terror. When placing his claims together with the testimonys made in books like ghost wars, tremendous suspicion is brought upon the likes of jane harman and madeline albright. Apparently, they had been interfering in the effort of CIA agents working alongside afghan warlord ahmed shah massoud to have al qaedas leader assassinated from 1998 to 2000. Canavan himself was mentioned in the 911 commission report as succumbing to these womens demands, saying that the plan put the afghan militants at too much risk and that the "operation was too complicated for the CIA." As if these institutes had any concern for the welfare of their hired-guns, or a proclivity against easily thwarted and overly elaborate raids. Anyway, on the morning that the september 11th attacks were unfolding, michael canavan was an acting FAA official who had been designated as their hijack co-ordinator. In the event this kind of emergency took place, air traffic controllers were expected to "notify their supervisors, who in turn would inform management all the way up to FAA headquarters. These headquarters had a hijack coordinator, who was the director of the FAA Office of Civil Aviation Security or his or her designate." But, strangely enough, even though canavan had previously been serving in this position for nine months without incident, he was absent for the entire duration of the attack, and did not even get back to his post until later that evening, after building 7 collapsed. His flimsy excuse for this dereliction of duty was that he had been 'visiting the airport in san juan' or some such nonsense.

Finally, bringing the circle of suspicious characters across americas special operations to a close, is the commander of SOCOM itself, general charles holland, who came on the radar after his treasonous shut down of able danger, which was an innovative research effort aimed at gathering electronic data on terror operatives from around the world, and which was later discovered to have identified a number of the 911 hijackers, including ring leader mohammed atta. This, along with many other deliberate intelligence failures, was what allowed the devastating attacks to go forward unimpeded. SOCOM headquarters is located on macdill air force base, as are a number of its subordinate units. How convenient it was, for such a duplicitous individual to be in command of several thousand elite members of the nations special forces, and stationed at the only base in the country where flight 77 could have been landed in without attracting undue attention. Something we can be sure of, is that general hollands guilt does not end with the shut down of able danger alone. For one thing, he became heavily invested in the financial escapades of aerovironment, a company which experienced huge profits after the war on terror began. They offer a host of unmanned aireal vehicles to the US military, models that are alleged to use software bootlegged from the global hawk project. How in the world did they manage to get their hands on that? So far, nobody has bothered to ask mr holland on the role played by his co-worker, william hodges. Prior to his assignment as commander of macdill air force base, brigadier general hodges had been posted to the staff of the assistant secretary of the air force for acquisition, probably as a subordinate of lieutenant general stephen plummer. Being on the USAFs scientific advisory board, this puts them in a position of influence over the air forces scientific research office in arlington virginia, located just down the block from a raytheon facility which was working on a revolutionary new guidance system! Seeing that so many of the individuals serving there would mysteriously perish during the september 11th attacks, are we honestly to believe that this is just a coincidence?

Maybe someone can explain why this laboratory was being headed by doctor lyle schwartz, a former director or NIST (!), or his connections to arden bement, who was a board member of the battelle corporation during the time that it was supplying linear cutting charges and hyper-weaponised anthrax to the CIA and pentagon?... In light of all the details that have been posited so far, it seems distinctly possible that SOCOM and JSOC created a top secret task force to co-ordinate the controlled demolition of the WTCs, and the swapping of three commercial airliners with remote controlled drones. With access to thermite demolition charges and aireal guidance systems granted through their contacts in this research office, the armys special operations command should be singled out for close scrutiny by 911 researchers. Given the especially high concentration of suspects throughout USASOC, with operatives drawn from across its six mission sub-units, its a sure bet that they were used as a vector to carry out the staging of this synthetic terror plot. With army engineers and ordnance experts for the controlled demolitions and field works, aircraft maintenance engineers from SOAR to modify the KC-767 tankers, and a detachment of soldiers to handle the prisoners offloaded from the AA and UA flights, they could have easily managed more than half of the actions that were taking place that day... In summary, the convergence of high ranking officials from the private sector, pentagon, air force, and army special operations underlies just how heavily the widespread moral corruption has progressed through western society. Certainly, there are very few institutes throughout america which have managed to resist the allure of secret alliances and backroom deals. Its no wonder that they have unanimously banned together, irrespective of class or ideology, to oppose the allegations that have been made by the 911 truth movement. In the end, though, it looks like their efforts were in vain, and the drive to conceal this colossal crime against humanity will result in the downfall of far more people than those who perpetrated the attacks in the first place.


Note
*Although TF 373s true kill/capture toll is not known to the public, its worth mentioning that a similar unit operating in iraq, TF black, is acknowledged to have removed or killed up to 3500 insurgents, not including innocent bystanders who were caught in the crossfire. So anyway we cut it, general palumbo is a mass murderer, having ordered his soldiers to carry out targeted killings via foot patrols or air strikes.

New years prospects (updated!)

Well, it looks like 2013 is going to be a very fortuitous year for me. As you undoubtedly know by now, I posted a list of objectives for myself that I wanted to complete for the new year. Through an enormous amount of willpower, I managed to get half of these public goals (as well as a number of private ones I did not list) accomplished! Geese, only two months in to 2013, and my list is already getting outdated... But, its definitely nothing to complain to complain about. The NWO is escalating its efforts to wrest control away from the people, and I am now in the privileged position where, after being a hapless bystander to their crimes for two years, I can offer significant resistance to them. I hope for all the world that you, my loyal audience, will recognise this fact and throw your support behind me.

I have now identified many routes of action which will help contribute to the establishments decline. If you are interested in participating in these various campaigns, then read on! Now, this revised list is going to contain some ideas I have about how to take this fight to the next level. Those of us who identify as patriots need to start getting more active in undermining this wayward system of ours. That means taking our money out of big banks, short changing the government on taxes, and informing our fellow citizens on the dangerous course taken by our supreme leaders. I'm also going to try and resist the temptation to shoehorn in my own personal goals, such as finding a steady job (none of that seasonal shit!), balancing my painful debts, improving my writing style, upping my front squat and bench press, and pwning newbs on youtube. I spend way too much time on that lastpart, anyway.

Dream on, punk!

Carry out a money bomb to support alternative media

This is something I've been considering for a couple of months. I've determined that a big part of defeating the NWO is providing a counter to the intellectual garbage put out by state media. There are alot of small, 2-3-4 person news outlets that are honest and hard working, but don't get the love and respect they deserve. I would like to help change that. By the end of the year, I am hoping that I can set up some basic fundraising that will provide donations to small media groups, like adam versus the man, boiling frogs post, etc. I've never done anything of this nature before, so there will be alot of mis steps involved in this effort, and even if it does end up succeeding, the financial contributions will only be modest. Probably not much more than 2000$ or so. Not much, but its a good start (especially for outlets that have no working budget at all)! Again, nothing too complicated at this point, but these sorts of funds are sorely needed by the alternative media. Anyone who has some advice to contribute is welcome to get in contact with me!

Create a volunteer organisation that remakes tesla technology

This is a highly speculative mission that probably will probably blow up in my face, but I just thought the idea was so cool! I originally had heard jeremy rys talking about this a while back, and I wondered why nobody had attempted it before. Many of the blue prints for doctor teslas designs can still be found today, and the temptation to build these devices and test their utility is nearly overwhelming. Even if we can't get an office set up in my area, I would be thrilled to know that there was a facility somewhere (run by honest men and women, working in their spare time) actually trying to do this stuff! The completion of such a shop would be like a slap in the face to big oil, who had an infamous feud with nicola tesla and his acolytes, who were working on some free energy devices, or at least devices which were much cheaper than fossil fuels.

I am definitely going to need to get in touch with some organisations that have experience in setting up non-profit work shops like this, and see what the potential challenges and pit falls are. Once that all gets worked out, then the next step will be finding the kindof people who have the experience necessary to get an operation like this off the ground, and find them a suitable location on which they can do so! I'm no gearhead, or even a big tesla fan, but come on, this has got to be one of the coolest concepts that have been put out there in the last few years. I would absolutely love to get involved with a project as crazy as this. If nothing else, it would look damn good on my portfolio :)  Just think about it... I could have a loudspeaker set out in the garage, a hot tub and barbecue in the backyard, order around people much more experienced than me. Mmmmm.

Infiltrate a major activist movement

Pretty self explanatory. There is a disappointing absence of libertarians, anarchists, and truthers in these online civil rights networks. Some of them, like avaaz, are alleged to be under zionist influence. That must change some day. These movements can be a major source of influence on minor issues, and we need to be able to leverage that kind of soft power in some shape or form. It won't stop the globalists from building their FEMA camps, from stealing billions of taxpayer dollars every day, and from continuing to occupy foreign countrys, but have no mistake: The ability to unite millions of people together on a single issue is something that we patriots are badly in need of. Right now, these networks are wasting their influence on petty issues like gay rights, forrest preservation, and insurance fraud... It is time that we embark on a campaign to move our leaders into a position of influence amongst these misguided groups.

Get involved with local politics

Many political analysts have commented (in exasperation) on just how corrupt the federal government has become. Speaking for myself, I would not use the word 'corrupt' so much as 'completely infiltrated by private interests.' Americans have been subjected to the most outrageous and petty restrictions you can imagine, with people being arrested for growing gardens, for resisting TSA genital groping, and displaying (pink) bubble guns at a demonstration! This is worse than what nazi germans had to put up with, for christ sakes. If you are a popular guy or gal, gather your friends together and get involved in county and state elections. Pick a party that is as pro-liberty as possible, even if they have a laughable chance at actually winning. If we want to undoe the parasitic infection of america, we need to start one state at a time, ensuring that our communitys resources do not get placed in the hands of an anti-constitutional scumbag.

9/11 Contradictions

Back in march of 2008, david ray griffin released a book which attempted to detail the flaws of the 911 commission report, in a vein similar (but not identical) to his earlier work, distortions and omissions. It is unique among the literature in that no special knowledge of physics or intelligence protocols is required to get value out of it. This was written specifically for the benefit of the congress and press, who have little time to study complex issues, and are reluctant to look into any possible difficultys with the public story (for fear of the 'conspiracy theorist' stigma). It outlines the blatant inconsistencys of the deeply flawed report by organising a series of thrusts, each of which gravely compromise the integrity of the commissions narrative. This is an interesting approach which succinctly demonstrates the inability of the governments formal tale to withstand rigorous, informed scrutiny. Behold:

Below, the summary for each of the books first five chapters will be deposited for the convenience of those who still have the gall to publicly emphasise their support for the 911 commission report. This book has been available for just about five years now, and not one of these clowns has been able to mount a defense against griffins criticisms of their holy text. As long as this status quo remains unchanged, these yellow bellied pseudo-skeptics have NO RIGHT to continue acting as if their views are any more valid than our own. Actually, going by the fact that there has still been no legitimate debunking of the one comprehensive timeline to oppose the 911 commission, one could even jump to the wild conclusion that the narrative espoused by truthers has more credibility! In the end, only time (and further efforts by government apologists) will tell.

-1. How long did george bush remain in the classroom?: These storys suggesting fear at the airport did not, in any case, solve the problem. Indeed, they arguably made it worse. If such fear existed at that time, so that there was concern to get the presidential plane into the air as quickly as possible, why was there apparently no such fear while the presidential party was at the school? Why was the president allowed to linger for a full half hour at the school after it was known that america was, as card put it, 'under attack?' This question was of great concern to familys of the 911 victims. One of the central questions raised by the family steering committee for the 911 commission -as thomas kean and lee hamilton, the chair and vice chair of the commission admit- was: 'Why was president bush permitted by the secret service to remain in the saratosa elementary school where he was reading to children?' Kean and hamilton 911 commission, however, provided no answer. Its only response to this question was to say: 'The secret service told us they were anxious to move the president to a safer location, but did not think it imperative for him to run out the door.' That response implys that the presidents response were limited to (a) running out the door or (b) remaining at the school for another half hour. But there wa a third option: The secret service could have excused the PR session, walked the president out of the room, and whisked him away into the limo. We have here, in fact, an implicit contradiction within the official story: The claim by fleischer and rove that the presidential party feared an attack on the presidents life is contradicted by the secret services indication by its statement to the 911 commission -as well as by its behaviour at the school- that no such fear existed. In any case, we are still left with the central contradiction between the actual behaviour of the president at the school that morning and the account of that behaviour given by the white house -through andrew card and karl rove- on the first anniversary of 911.

 

-2. When did dick cheney enter the underground bunker?: Why did the 911 commission report contradict the combined testimony of david bohrer, richard clarke, norman mineta, condoleeza rice, karl rove, ABC, the BBC, the wall street journal, and even dick cheney himself (in at least one interview) with regard to the time of cheneys arrival in the PEOC? Why was the testimony of the most important of these witnesses, secretary of transportation norman mineta, not mentioned in the commissions report and not contained in its archived videotape? And why do we have four different answers -about 9:10, about 9:36, about 9:43, and about 9:58- to the question as to when cheney arrived?

 

-3. Was cheney observed confirming a stand down order?: Obviously, all the alternate accounts cannot be true. And even if the commissions incoming flight story is the only alternative account taken into consideration, it and minetas account cannot both be true. There are, moreover, three reasons to suspect that the most accurate account is the one given by mineta. First, he had no obvious motive to lie. Second, he has recently, as pointed out in the previous chapter, reaffirmed his account, stating that the vice president (along with mrs cheney) was already there when he arrived in the PEOC at about 9:20, and stating that the exchange between cheney and the young man definitely occurred before the attack on the pentagon. Third, the various alternative accounts appear to have been created primarily for the purpose of overcoming the impression, sure to be given by the episode reported by mineta, that cheney had confirmed orders not to shoot down an aircraft approaching the pentagon.

 

-4. Did cheney observe the land all planes order?: We can perhaps understand that hollywood would take the 911 commission report as definitive, especially given the fact that ben sliney would make a better central figure for a movie than would norman mineta. But surely congress and the press should be more critical, asking why, if both mineta and garvey said that the decision was made by mineta, the commission simply attributed it to sliney, without even mentioning mineta -just as it also obliterated minetas testimony about the events that occurred in the PEOC at about 9:25 or 9:26. If both of these omissions, along with the commissions replacement storys, were due to the commissions decision to falsify the truth about cheneys presence in the PEOC, then getting the truth of the matter revealed would be of prime importance.

-5. When did cheney issue shootdown authorisation?: The 911 commissions account of when vice president cheney issued the shootdown authorisation has been contradicted by richard clarke and several military officers, including colonel robert marr (the head of NEADs), general larry arnold (the head of NORAD within the continental united states), and brigadier general montague winfield (deputy director of operations at the NMCC) - three officers in an especially good position to know.

 

 

 Exactly where it belongs.

 

These are just a few of the twenty five internal contradictions that festoon the 911 commission report. Clearly, it is with no sense of irony that believers in the OCT continue to denounce truthers as 'mere conspiracy theorists', since the views that they themselves advocate comfortably fit the definition of an outrageous conspiracy theory. It is likely that griffins detractions from the kean committee are a conservative under-estimate, and the ultimate tally of blunders could become far higher if one were to inquire about the various other strange occurrences that bring the official story into question. The global structural failures of three steel framed skyscrapers in a single day, something which had never happened before in history (not even once!). The destruction of the office of naval intelligence at the pentagon, which had just begun an investigation to track down $2.3 trillion in unadjusted funds, which secretary rumsfeld had announced the day before in his beauracy to battlefield speech.

 

Note:

For any reader who wants the complete list of summarys for all 25 chapters (and other tidbits), you can write drop a request into the comment section. The easiest way to do so is to select the Name/URL option, and just enter a name to satisfy the ID tag.

Grenades grenades grenades!

Alright, back to some military themed posts. There have been a profusion of new hardware gimmicks making their debut on the market, which are aimed towards improving the effectiveness of grenade launchers. Some of these are major leaps forward in capability over what previous designs have been able to provide. Before we embark on studying all the specifics of this, it is worth deliberating over exactly what the true purpose of these weapons are in combat. While the role of traditional hand grenades has been portrayed as that of an area denial weapon, defining a space in which no human being would venture into (which has the useful ability to be safely thrown from behind cover), the handling of a grenade launcher clearly has different elements involved. For example, in order for the operator to acquire a target, he must partially expose himself and become vulnerable to counterfire. Additionally, the added size and weight of the grenade launcher entails a shift in weapon status for its wielder, from secondary to primary. While the greatly increased range and accuracy is a definite plus, the grenade launcher has moved away from its previous status as a risk free weapon of convenience.
 
Now, with that observation out of the way, lets have a look at all the innovative designs at our disposal. There is the milkor M32, metal storm 3GL, QLZ-87B, PAW-20, F2000, and XM-25. The latter two examples introduce remarkable new employment options. The GL1 grenade launcher (mounted composite with the F2000 rifle) features an integrated laser sight, which verifys the range to target. The user only needs to paint the 'object of interest' to activate the ballistic computer, which will provide him with an effortless firing solution: Elevating the grenade launcher in the direction of the target, he will be informed of whether or not it is at the correct firing angle by LED lights mounted on the sight. When considering the curved trajectory of the 40x46mm round, this will allow shooters to easily place shells into enemy dead space. The XM-25, on the other hand, provides the same ability through a considerably different process. Again using a laser rangefinder to determine the distance to the target, this time, the weapons ballistic computer will provide detonation commands to the fuze of a grenade in the chamber. It does this by calculating the number of rotations the round will make on its way to the target! Clever, eh? By virtue of the weapons flat arc, any grenades it spits out will explode at a distance that was pre-set by the user and computer (which, in most cases, would be directly above an enemys head). This allows the saturation of targets in foxoles and trenchs, even without the use of plunging fire (as the F2000 system does).

The QLZ-87B, PAW-20, and XM-25 are all multi-shot weapons, being fed from a stacked magazine in a conventional manner. The fact that they do not need to be reloaded after each discharge is a highly desirable feature. Unfortunately, the latter two examples make use of proprietary grenade calibers, which are small and limited in their potency. The former example, while using full sized rounds, is also quite heavy and inconvenient for a single soldier to carry around. This marginalises their applicability as a grenadier weapon, with the attributes to replace the workhouse M320. What is needed is a system that is fairly lightweight, can fire multiple shots, has an affinity for counter defilade shooting, and also fields the standard 40x46mm grenade rounds. These requirements rule out everything except for the milkor M32, and metal storm 3GL! The imposing EX-41 china lake model (which won so much acclaim in ralph zumbros book) would also be a prime candidate, were it not for the fact that it had a tiny production run, and has been out of service for decades. The question we now have to ask ourselves is, which model has the best characteristics for its role as a primary weapon? Lets go through all the specifics. For size and weight, the M32 is 32 inchs long, and 11.7 lbs in weight. The 3GL, meanwhile, is 30 inchs long, and 5.5 lbs in weight. This clearly gives it the edge, even though its magazine capacity is of three rounds, compared to the mikors six (the difference between three grenades and six is, after all, smaller than the difference between three grenades and one!).

 The EX-41, in all its glory. As paris

hilton would say... Thats hot.

However, the question we really need to ask ourselves now is whether or not the 3GL (in its current form) is worth the cost of acquisition? Although there would not be the difficultys with ammo incompatibility that are faced by the XM-25, it really doesn't seem worth it to go through the trouble of replacing the just recently introduced M320 system... That is, until, you take a look at the untapped potential the 3GL posses'. The metal storm technology this weapon is based on allows multiple rounds to be loaded into, and fired from, a single barrel. This is distinct from those designs which make use of revolver or magazine fed systems, which can be quite bulky when packing many full sized grenades. Additionally, the 3GL has been designed to be within the same tolerances as the M203/M320 and so achieves similar range, velocity & accuracy. It makes use of standard 40x46mm grenade warheads which are inserted into the metal storm ‘tail assembly.’ Again, this would make the system much more attractive to nations which currently use the standard 40x46mm rounds. The modern caseless propellant and gas seals developed by metal storm are clearly secure, and the electrical firing system is much simpler than the earlier efforts. The MS rounds basically use STK projectiles with a caseless propellant and gas seal unit affixed to the back, in place of the usual cartridge case.

With that being the case, there is a specific direction that this grenade launchers design could be taken in, to make it a truly worthy addition to our nations arsenal. Anthony g williams, in his article, some thoughts on metal storm, imagined a new type of grenade launcher which could take advantage of the MS propellant block and gas seal. This allows multiple rounds to be loaded and fired from a single barrel, making for a much more compact weapon than competing MGL systems. By using two barrels, with four rounds in each, it would be handier than the milkor, with a faster rate of fire, more ammunition capacity, and the opportunity to employ multiple different rounds at the same time. One option would be to keep the first barrel loaded, and leave the second free to hand load specialised rounds such as flare, smoke, or video reconnaissance types. This would obviate the need for the operator to employ a personal weapon, as they would have the capability to fire flechette rounds to neutralise point targets. Maybe this would be the opportunity to introduce those canister rounds that g2mil mentioned back in the day. You know, the ones which splinter into multiple segments so as to cover one square meter of space at a distance of 500 meters?

Actually, there are a large variety of special rounds that can be implemented with this design, which would make this double barreled grenade launcher a truly multi purpose weapons system. Even something as wacky as a HEDP round that can be guided towards a moving target through a SACLOS setup. But this is a topic best saved for another post. For now, our objective of investigating the best possible replacement for the M320 that money can buy is complete. The fire control system of the F2000 has especially interesting potential, particularly when considering it can be programmed to take into account the ballistic properties of up to six or more types of grenades... As a final note, just in case some people are still confused about what the squad mission of a grenade launcher is, it is enlightening to look at the results of the vietnam-era Infantry Rifle Unit Study (IRUS). According to it, the M79 pattern weapon was found to be most effective when employed as an area suppression weapon in the attack, but of comparatively little value in the defense. Whether a multi shot design like the EX-41 (which was in service at around that same time period) would suffer from these same weakness' is unknown. Only the future will tell!

New years prospects

A list of objectives I have for 2013. Some of these may not be entirely plausible (!), and my implementation of them might be limited to simply lobbying more powerful groups to give them consideration.

-Stage a conference warning about the limitations of the scientific method: This is critical because of the many areas of study which have been neglected due to methodological holes in our framework. Contrary to popular belief, science is not an infallible process. In general, theorys and/or findings are accepted only when they become more useful than harmful for the current generation of scientists. For example, although practical cold fusion power would be very useful to society as a whole, its realisation would be harmful to physicists engaged in the research of alternative methods of energy production. Hot fusion is a big business which consumes billions of dollars a year, and the establishment has a vested interest in seeing that this remains so. There are other problems that work in concert with this obstructive conservatism, like complexity brakes, confirmation bias, etc.

-Smooth over the differences between the various truth factions: At this moment in time, the movement is split into numerous different camps. They are mainly divided on what destroyed the world trade centers, I.E, controlled demolition, nuclear ordnance, directed energy weapons, etc. But this also extends to other matters, like on what (if anything) hit the pentagon. In a word, it is planes vs no planes. That is not a category of my own devising, BTW. The view that flight 77 actually did crash into the pentagon has been widely adopted among the upper echelon of truthers, and they have declared anyone not in agreeance with their stance as a no-planer. This includes people such as myself, who are compelled by the fighter jet/global hawk evidence. These sibling rivalrys have been going on for too long, and it is time they get settled in an adult manner!

-Get some papers published in scientific journals: Yes, it is true. I have ambitions of getting my ideas passed through the vaunted peer review process, so that they may obtain recognition (and derision) from the community at large. Circulating ones theorys on the blogosphere can only take you so far, after all. At a certain point, after you realise that your concepts have reached maturity... You have to man up and face the gauntlet of experts, salivating at the thought of ripping your precious ideas to shreds. The sad fact is, in order for your views to have any real impact on the world, they will need to achieve the gold star of peer review. At this point, I have three different subjects in mind, all completely unrelated to each other, as is my practise. There is an amalgam theory of hominid-to-human evolution, some speculation on the abilitys of superintelligent agents, and possibly (I hope) a hypothesis for how the twin towers were demolished.

 

 

-Redress the unfair stigma that is associated with anarchism: For some reason or another, this political ideology has received the full wrath of the establishment propaganda. Anarchists are treated like contagious lepors, which is surprising, given that their philosophy is based merely on the rejection of dictators (I.E, any leader who rules by force), and adherance to the non-aggression principle. Many thinkers who identify themselves with anarchism, such as stefan molyneux, have provided solid reasons for why a civilised peoples should never be willing to trust their leaders as far as they can throw them, regardless of whether they were 'elected' to their position or not. The government is an organisation which has a built in shelf life, past which, it becomes a bloated hulk corrupted by special interests, totally incapable of serving the public interest. If the people understood simple concepts like these, maybe they wouldn't be scratching their heads, wondering why the world is some $50 trillion plus (at a minimum!) in debt.

-Get some professional advertising for the blog: Well, it goes without saying, but theres no such thing as too much publicity! I started this site for the express purpose of compiling some opinions of mine that could not be conveyed through a video log (for one reason or another), which would only be shared amongst my small audience. A glorified journal log, in short. For the first 9 months or so, thats exactly what it was. But then around may, I started getting alot more incoming traffic, and people leaving me messages commenting on stuff I had covered. This got me thinking that there was more potential for this blog than I originally thought, and I started publicising it randomly across the internet. This brought in even more views, and now I am hooked on the idea... At this point, its a forgone conclusion that investing some money into data mining engines would be appropriate.

-Pursue the indictment of the 911 suspects: In agreement with the citizens investigation team, I feel the best strategy in seeking justice for the victims is for informed and concerned citizens to join together to put pressure on local, state, and even federal authorities to seek indictments against those who are already directly implicated in these savage crimes. Imagine what would happen if this process was actually completed, and someone like paul bremer, joseph kasputys, or jerome hauer was forced to testify in court about their personal actions on the day of (and preceding) the september 11th attacks. It would make norman minetas testimony seem almost insignificant by comparison! For my part, I plan to vigorously pursue this campaign by lobbying media figures and elected representatives (though I have no idea exactly which individuals would be amenable to such requests) to investigate the suspicious connections that these men have with the criminal bush family, and how they could have facilitated amongst themselves a false flag attack.


As an aside, there are a number of other unfolding situations which deserve some attention. The your-rights-volunteer campaign is a small youtube phenomenon that is starting to gather some steam. It is a unique idea on how to challenge the establishment, and bypass the traditional routes of cultural reform. I will be very interested to see what direction this will all go, but will refrain from participating in it any further until I get more information. With that said, I do think the guys aims are way overambitious, and I have no idea how he is planning to overcome some of the technical challenges. How will the YRV movement spread to the point where it can achieve a 51% majority anywhere, especially with voter fraud and such? How will they know the right person to elect for the position, someone who has the skills and isn't indebted by special interests? And finally, how does one county recall the elected partys of the whole state/province? Its a major unknown at this point.

Within a couple of months, I would also like to make some more videos pertaining to subjects like conspiracy, and how they are interpreted differently by each person. Some individuals react to it as a black person would to nigg3r, they are just that narrow minded and PC. Pathologising the behaviour of pseudo-skeptics will also be very important, seeing as how they have completely ran off the deep end and abandoned all pre-texts of impartiality when making their sweeping judgements on fringe ideas. Would also like to write some essays regarding post-singularity ethics. One lesson I have in mind is drawn from an african folk story, about how a clever hyena was able to act in mirthless ways without suffering the traditional repercussions that are bestowed on wrong doers by society. Realising that instrumental benevolence will cease to be a concern for superintelligent agents is a leap that most people seem unable to make, so deeply ingrained is its sway within their psyche.


Until next time, best wishes, and happy new year!