If Washington D.C. Were A Candidate For Government


If Washington D.C. were a candidate for government, I’d ask it many questions to see if the District was the right government for me.

I’d put Washington D.C. upon a pulpit with several other States, or at least my own State of Utah, and see which one had morals and values as close to my own. Of course, I’d attach a lie detector to verify the truth of its answers…

And I imagine that honest dialog and candid Q & A would go something like this:

Question #1

Mr. Washington D.C, what goals and accomplishments have you made towards cleaning up the streets in your City and getting your homeless citizens off the streets? And what would you tell the average American household living in one of the States who may wish to either move to your fair district or to have you as their re-elected Central government for 2014?

And then I imagine its answer would go something like this:

“Uh-huh- well, um , I… ah, that’s a great question there, Clint. As the central government of the United States, Washington D.C. has always striven to be the model City of moral certitude in this nation. Compared to Utah over there, our murder rate jumped by 69% in February of last year… Overall, though, incidents of violent crime — homicides, sexual assaults, robberies, assaults with deadly weapons and all that nasty business — well, they are rising at an alarming pace. The biggest increase was in the 1st District, which includes ah, you know… the ah, well… Capitol Hill – where violent crime  jumped by 69 percent, with 110 incidents reported compared with 65 at this point last year. In Washington D.C. we have wonderfully high crime statistics. For instance, your chances of becoming a victim of violent crime in Washington now stands at about 1 in 83 persons, with about 12.02 annual crimes per 1,000 residents. Real estate fact-checking site “Neighborhood Scout” rates Washington D.C. on its crime index as a 5 out of 100 for the safeness of its residents, making Washington D.C. “Safer than 5% of the cities in the United States”. The district had an impressive average of 542 crimes per square mile, compared with the United States American city comparison and medium average of 39 crimes per square mile. We’re proud to be riddled with crime here in our decaying festering ooze of a City. And our moto is “What happens in Washington D.C. is top secret, and stays in D.C. And as you know, Clint, our State- er, ah- District corporation flower is the Afghanistan Poppy. Now, if your question is to ask whether a family should move from say the State of Utah over there, my answer would have to be absolutely! I mean just consider the two side by side… Utah’s annual crime rate per 1,000 residents is at 1.95 – That’s almost 1,000 percent less than in our dark city of Washington D.C. here. And for God’s sake, one of your children has a 1 in 513 chance of becoming a victim of violent crime in Utah, again a more than 600% less chance to be mugged, shot, or stabbed. And don’t forget: Washington D.C. has double the property theft and triple the motor vehicle theft than the United States average. And let’s face it, even the great gangland City of Chicago can’t hold a candle to the political crime and theft happening from within Capital Hill. We like to say Washington is any mafia’s wet dream! Now who in their right mind wouldn’t want little old Washington D.C. to be the central organized criminal government of their State?”

Question #2

Ah yes… Mr. Washington D.C, what is your stance on illegal immigration, and, what is your message to those illegal immigrants who try and move into Washington without legal status?

“Oh splendid; another good question my lad… You’ve asked a question dear to my heart, Clint. You know – everyone I’m sure is familiar with our border security program, allowing millions of undocumented workers into each and every State they choose to enter. But our real pride and joy is our own little City of Sin here. You know, Washington D.C. is already one of the most secure City’s in the entire world, with a whole secret service and military at our instant disposal. So you can imagine how proud we are to say that… ah, well- most- well no… a lot of our citizens are in fact legal residents. Why in 2007, Judicial Watch put out a wonderful article exposing what a fine place Washington D.C. is for non-citizen illegal aliens. It stated that “Judicial Watch Lawsuit Uncovers Documents Detailing Washington, D.C. Police Department’s Illegal Immigration Sanctuary Policies  – Former Washington D.C. Police Chief Charles H. Ramsey (stated): “The department is… not in the business of enforcing civil immigration laws”. It went on to verify in a lawsuit that: “Within days of the filing of Judicial Watch’s lawsuit, the Washington DC’s Police Department released a memo from Charles H. Ramsey who, until recently, served as Chief of Police, that states: “MPD [Washington’s Metropolitan Police Department] officers are strictly prohibited from making inquiries into citizenship or residency status for the purpose of determining whether an individual has violated the civil immigration laws or for the purpose of enforcing those laws… the MPD is not in the business of inquiring about the residency status of the people we serve and is not in the business of enforcing civil immigration laws. (end quote) The newly released documents also reiterate the “limited” and infrequent support the department offers to federal immigration officials. “The sanctuary policies of Washington DC’s police department are a disgrace and an affront to the rule of law. Local police departments do not have a free pass to violate and undermine federal immigration law,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Our nation’s capital, of all places, should not undermine federal immigration law, but rather set an example for other cities in the U.S. I hope Congress and the Bush administration take some action to ensure that the rule of law is respected here in Washington, DC.”… Judicial Watch filed a taxpayer lawsuit seeking to end a similar sanctuary police policy in Los Angeles, known as “Special Order 40.” And our wonderful Washington, D.C. Mayor Vincent Gray signed an executive order in the District formalizing the existing “don’t-ask-don’t-tell” policy – a policy which prohibits police from inquiring about the immigration status of people they arrest or from reporting that status to federal authorities. So to answer your question… we absolutely love illegal immigration, and we sincerely welcome all newcomers to our great and obviously tightly secured and safe city. And of course Americans can trust us in Washington D.C. to be responsible for protecting the borders of both Washington D.C. and of all of America. Don’t worry, we’ll just ad the cost to the national debt. And chances are that will never be paid off – at least in your or your children’s lifetime. And by the way, our publicity department posted this information this year, stating: “The Washington DC metro area’s foreign-born population increased 70 percent during the 1990s. This growth accounts for 49 percent of the District of Columbia’s overall population increase. This population growth translates into struggles for the metro area, including overcrowded schools, traffic gridlock, and a rising burden on taxpayers as communities struggle to meet the increased demand for public services. The Cost of Illegal Immigration in Washington DC – The District of Columbia’s foreign-born population increased by almost 29 percent between the years 2000 and 2006. During that period, the District of Columbia gained almost 21,000 immigrants, bringing the total number of foreign-born residents in the state to over 94,000.  The District of Columbia’s naturalized population is 22,050, one of the lowest rates in the country. The national average naturalized population rate is 40.1 percent. This low rate of naturalization continues the trend from 1990, and indicates the high settlement rate of new immigrants and the growing number of illegal immigrants. Less than one-third, or 29.3 percent, of the District of Columbia’s 58,887 foreign-born residents have become naturalized U.S. citizens. The national average of naturalized foreign-born residents is 40.3 percent.  The cost of illegal immigration to DC residents is considerable as taxpayer dollars are responsible for incarceration, medical, and the educational costs of immigrants.” Now how can you argue with those statistics? Washington D.C. is the central government for you, specializing in all your border security and illegal immigration needs! And as for Utah there, its hard to say. Utah is now one of our most favorite States in the Union. You know we are just nearing completion of the largest data mining center in the universe, and the computer and internet corporations are being paid to move to Utah as data collectors by U.S. Taxpayer dollars, namely low interest loans called Corporate Bonds. Despite this fact, even as Utah is fast becoming one of the most monitored, recorded, and filmed States in the Union, we love it because at the same time Utah has allowed the United States corporation here in Washington D.C. to pass very good sanctuary laws there, including Federal programs like E-Verify, which punishes employers for not hiring illegal aliens. You see, Utah now offers illegal aliens work permits. All they have to do is cross a few borders and they are safe in the center of America’s high desert! Of course we won’t try and stop ’em. We encourage this journey. Me and the boys here nicknamed it the enchilada trail of tears. But hey, the more the merrier, I say… know what I mean?”

Question #3

Speaking of the new National Security Agency building in Utah, just how do you plan on securing our airspace and airports if you were re-elected as central government?

“Well, my boy, I’m sure glad you asked that. That’s a softball question, so let’s hit it out of the park, shall we? Now as you know Washington D.C. and its massive corporate surveillance apparatus, of which the District and federal pension and other trust investment schemes around the country and the world stand as the main institutional investor and shareholder, have entered into government mandated partnerships with internet service and software providers to ensure that any and all digital transactions and messages get recorded and cataloged. Facial and movement recognition is already in place in some airports across the nation, and we expect very soon to have biometric data retrieval hard and software in place some time in the next couple of years. The microchip is still in the works, and we hope to transfer that right into the finger or somewhere on the right arm. There has been talk of a forehead placement for instant brain interface purposes, but that would be a last resort due to cancer concerns. As you know Clint the government’s First Net closed internet is also nearing completion, which means that not even the most remote location in Alaska will not have government private internet access. We are really excited about that one, I must say. And of course we still have the standard no-fly list that is ever-increasing in bad citizens. We here at Washington D.C. feel that the best way to stop terrorists from flying is to stop free-thinking, educated, and law-abiding citizens from flying at all. We think our record stands for itself. We are not afraid to touch anyone… anywhere. Our credo here at Washington D.C’s corporate subsidiary called Transportation Security Agency – that’s TSA for short, is: not by law or by moral or by right, we shall serve the people through radiation and molestation. We stand by our lower than average IQ citizens who bravely go where no others will go in the TSA, and they know that privacy is tantamount to terrorism. And by the way, we are taking requests for names to add to that no-fly list, and you can apply by simply talking negatively about government or, you know, blowing the whistle on one of our less than legal projects or corporations. We also now offer permits for free speech and other privileges within airport property, as you well know Clint. Our permit system is ever expanding, and we expect these permits for free speech to extend to all parts of the United States. And we just finished constructing and revitalizing many old and new “free speech zones”, now offering more enclosed public-private-partnership spaces in each State for those with permits to speak. All in all, if anyone is still even allowed to fly by 2016, we expect to have a complete monopoly on all aspects of the flying experience, from controlling stock in the airlines, baggage companies, airport restaurants and shops, Duty free shops, services, and of course the entire security grid for all airports in the nation – that is, of course, if the United States is re-elected as your central government.”

Alright, thank you Mr. Washington D.C. Just one final question…

How do you propose to control the increase in insider trading taking place on the commodities, bond, and stock markets today?

“Well, of course, we will protect our congressmen and Senators who participate in that privilege, just as we have for decades. Why our own ethics committee members are some of the most prolific insider traders on the block! We were even profiled on 60 minutes for our special talent at profiting from inside information. This is just one of the many privileges that our members of the legislature enjoy. And the Executive and Judicial branches certainly will continue with their efforts on this front. I assure you, Clint and the people of America, when it comes to your government and its privileges of insider trading, I can guarantee you that big government will keep its nose out of your representative government’s activities. So again, people… remember to vote United States on your next ballot for central government of America. And if you decide to go with another candidate this year, we understand all that hope and change rhetoric. Our corporate interest and control in Diebold and other companies who manufacture your voting machines guarantee to be right there to collect and tally your votes for central government, so you know the election process will be guaranteed to be honest and fair. Honest. As always, thank you for your patriotic support and manufactured consent. We plan on being here to serve and protect you for a very, very, very, very, very long time to come.

–=–

Of course, many will recognize this as satire, though barely so.

I’ll tell you one thing… If Washington D.C, its presidents, its congress, and its judicial branches were going to be on the ballot this year as a single  candidate for the American central government, I certainly wouldn’t vote for it.

How ’bout you?

The real question is: How can a morally and ethically corrupt city-district like this be responsible for the rest of America when it can’t even govern itself within its own laws?

.

–Clint Richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Saturday, July 6th, 2013

Advertisements

9/11 facts and questions I’ll bet you can’t answer without being called a conspiracy theorist!


 

 

There were at least 86 independent cameras (gas stations, grocery stores, etc…) at, around, and pointed at the Pentagon on 9/11. In fact, it is the most surveiled area in the United States. All of the footage from these cameras were taken by the government. Why would all film footage from all 86 cameras at and surrounding the Pentagon be confiscated and never released to the public? There is one thing that would easily end all speculation into 9/11 – the camera footage from those 86 cameras. If there were nothing to hide, why would the government keep this film footage (the ultimate indisputable proof) from us?

–Ω–

BBC reporter Jane Standley, as she stood in front of the erect Solomon Bros. Building (WTC7), reported live to BBC London that building 7 had fallen 20 minutes before this building actually fell. Streaming news on BBC reported this as well. News footage was then lost, or cut. WTC7 fell minutes later after multiple explosions were heard, after new owner Larry Silverstein admittedly ordered the demolition with the industry term “pull-it”, and after firefighters at the scene counted down to ‘0’. If the collapse wasn’t expected, then why were there news announcements and a countdown? If the collapse was expected, how could demolition explosives be planted in a burning building in less than 8 hours? Why would they then cover this fact up?

–Ω–

George W. Bush lied in a town hall meeting when he said – verbatim:

I’d ah- was sitting outside ah- the- the classroom waitin’ to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower, of-er-a-of-a-T-ya know the TV was obviously on and I, I used to fly myself and I said, well there’s one terrible pilot, and ah- I said it must have been ah- horrible accident.

Bush was referring here to the day of 9/11, as he was about to go into a classroom to visit and read to children. The problem is, the video footage of the first plane hitting the Twin Towers wasn’t aired on broadcast TV until the next day, September 12th. So, the president could not have seen what he said he saw. As you might remember, Bush was told about the second plane inside the classroom, interrupting his classic “My Pet Goat” reading.

–Ω–

Osama Bin Laden has never been charged with any of the crimes of 9/11. On the FBI’s most wanted list, Bin Laden is wanted for other acts of terror, but not 9/11. He has never been indicted with any crime related to 9/11 in the 8 years since the so-called ‘attacks’. Why is this? Because there is apparently no concrete evidence relating Bin Laden to 9/11.

–Ω–

Osama Bin Laden has a history, as an asset for the C.I.A. His asset name is actually Tim Osman. In fact, Bin Laden was receiving kidney dialysis at a U.S. hospital in Dubai just prior to 9/11. Interestingly, Bin Laden stated on Al Jazeera Television on September 16, 2001 that he had no knowledge of the attacks. He also stated that the attacks of 9/11 appeared to be carried out by individuals with their own motivation. This interview was only aired once, and then never heard of again.

–Ω–

Marvin P. Bush, the president’s younger brother, was a principal in a company called Securacom, which provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport. The company had an ongoing contract to handle security at the World Trade Center “up to the day the buildings fell down.” On the weekend of September 8-9, 2001, WTC tower 2 (the south tower) was powered down – meaning there was no electrical supply for 36 hrs from floor 50 and up… “Of course without power there were no security cameras, no security locks on doors, and many, many ‘engineers’ coming in and out of the tower.” Marvin Bush was in New York on 9/11.

–Ω–

Is ‘Al-Qaeda” a fitting name for a terrorist group? Well, the widely known definition of ‘Al Qaeda’ is translated in English as ‘The Base’. However, this is not the only translation of the ominous term. There is another. “Ana raicha Al Qaeda” is a colloquial for “I’m going to the toilet”. A very common and widespread use of the word “Al-Qaeda” in different Arab countries in the public language is for ‘the toilet bowl’. This name comes from the Arabic verb “Qa’ada” which means “to sit” – pertinently, on the “Toilet Bowl”. In most Arabs homes there are two kinds of toilets: “Al-Qaeda” also called the “Hamam Franji” or foreign toilet, and “Hamam Arabi” or “Arab toilet” which is a hole in the ground. Lest we forget it, the potty used by small children is called “Ma Qa’adia” or “Little Qaeda”. And so, one must ask… Why would a terrorist group call itself ‘The Toilet’?

–Ω–

In September 2002, FBI Director Robert Mueller told CNN twice that there is “no legal proof to prove the identities of the suicidal hijackers.” Of these supposed Arab “terrorists” named by the U.S. government on 9/11 as the “hijackers”, the following were found to be alive after the events of 9/11: Waleed M. Alshehri, Wail M. Alshehri , Abdulaziz Alomari, Mohand Alshehri, Salem Alhazmi, Saeed Alghamdi, Ahmed Alnami. One must ask how this is possible?

Saeed Al-Ghamdi is one of three hijackers that US officials have said are linked to Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda network.” – BBC

I was completely shocked. For the past 10 months I have been based in Tunis with 22 other pilots learning to fly an Airbus 320. The FBI provided no evidence of my presumed involvement in the attacks.– Saeed Al-Ghamdi, Telegraph 23rd September 2001

Abdel Aziz Al-Omari and Saeed Hussein Gharamallah Al-Ghamdi, are well in life, the first in Saudi Arabia and the second in Tunisia for nine months.” – Wal Fadjri: 21st September 2001

A Saudi man has reported to authorities that he is the real Abdul Aziz Al-Omari, and claims his passport was stolen in 1995 while he studied electrical engineering at the University of Denver. Al-Omari says he informed police of the theft.” – ABC News

I couldn’t believe it when the FBI put me on their list. They gave my name and my date of birth, but I am not a suicide bomber. I am here. I am alive. I have no idea how to fly a plane. I had nothing to do with this… The name (listed by the FBI) is my name and the birth date is the same as mine, but I am not the one who BOMBED the World Trade Center in New York.Abdul Aziz Al-Omari – Telegraph 23rd September 2001 and Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper.

Al-Omari has since been found in Saudi Arabia and is apparently cleared in the case” – New York Times

–Ω–

Which of these sounds more like a far-fetched conspiracy theory?

(1) A group of angry Muslims who lived in caves with no amenities came to America and took over 4 airplanes with razorblades and then drove these impossibly large planes with limited flight experience into the twin towers and the Pentagon like professional pilots. (Note several were found to be alive after 9/11.)

-Or-

(2) Bombs and demolition explosives were planted in the WTC towers 1,2, and 7 which brought them down at free fall speed into their own footprint: and a fairy tail-like cover-up story was delivered to the world that over 100 stories fell straight down into themselves, concrete and metal completely pulverized, defying all known architectural and natural physics.

–Ω–

The United States has not officially declared war since World War II. The media still fraudulently informs us that we are at war with Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Pakistan. But, instead we are at war with “terror”… an intangible, unfathomable, untouchable, and yet quite a politically useful thing, which has no country, no boundaries, no leader, no limits, no definition, and no rules. War crimes, torture, rendition, indefinite detention, human rights violations, and ordinarily criminal POW treatment are all un-punishable by the Geneva Conventions and Nuremburg Principles simply because we are not officially at war. 9-11 is the catalyst for this and for the legislation that protects these war criminals. 9-11 must be exposed as fraud (which would also expose the “war on terror” as a fraud) in order to charge those deserving with these crimes of war and the unprecedented use of torture. It would also be nice to know who blew up the twin towers, and see them hang!

–Ω–

PNAC (Project for the New American Century) was an American think tank based in Washington D.C. that lasted from early 1997 to 2006. The PNAC’s stated goal was “…to promote American global leadership.” Its members included William Kristol, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, John McCain, Paul Wolfowitz, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Richard Perle, Steve Forbes, Robert B. Zoellick, John R. Bolton, Thomas Donnelly, and many others. Section V of ‘Rebuilding America’s Defenses’, entitled “Creating Tomorrow’s Dominant Force”, includes the sentence: “Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor”. PNAC supported the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (bill H.R.4655), which President Clinton had signed into law. In its “Preface”, in highlighted boxes, Rebuilding America’s Defenses states that it aims to: ESTABLISH FOUR CORE MISSIONS for the U.S. military:

• Defend the American homeland;
• Fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars;
• Perform the “constabulary” duties associated with shaping the security environment in critical regions;
• Transform U.S. forces to exploit the “revolution in military affairs”…

–Ω–

FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) was entrusted with the sole responsibility for investigating the collapse of the WTC complex immediately after 9/11. Strangely, FEMA is not an investigative agency. FEMA, in its so-called investigations, actually coordinated the destruction of all WTC debris and evidence almost immediately after 9/11. The structural steel was quickly removed and loaded on ships for transport to be melted in blast furnaces in India and China, and then dumped in the ocean. Most would see this as blatant destruction of pertinent evidence. Meanwhile, FEMA’s investigation of the collapses consisted of assembling a group of volunteer investigators from the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), dubbed the Building Performance Assessment Team (BPAT). This group was headed by W. Gene Corley, a structural engineer from Chicago who also led the fraudulent investigation of the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. (Incidentally, two other bombs reported by multiple news stations and eyewitnesses, which were found by the bomb squad in the Federal Building and defused, were then never heard about again.) Except for an early “tourist trip”, the BPAT assessment volunteers were barred from ever officially entering Ground Zero. They did not see a single piece of steel until almost a month after the disaster. They had to guess at the original building locations of the few pieces of steel they saw. They were only allowed to collect 150 specific pieces of steel for further study (out of millions of pieces). BPAT’s final report called for “further investigation and analysis”, but the report was not released until after the whole WTC site had been cleared, or “scrubbed” of evidence.

–Ω–

While FEMA allocated only $600,000 for the BPAT study, and didn’t allocate any funding for independent or non-biased investigations, NIST’s “Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation” was funded with an initial budget of $16 million. NIST’s results strongly indicate a cover-up. NIST avoids describing, let alone explaining, the “collapse” of each Tower after they were “poised for collapse.” Thus, NIST avoids answering the question their investigation was tasked with answering: how did the Towers collapse? NIST describes the Twin Towers without reference to the engineering history of other steel-framed buildings, and separates its analysis of WTC 7 into a separate report. By treating them in isolation, NIST hides just how completely different the alleged collapses of these three buildings are. In its own report, NIST reveals that it “adjusted the input” of variables in tests beyond the visual evidence of what actually happened in order to reinforce and save its own hypothesis. NIST also avoids disclosing the evidence of the unexplained sulfidation documented in Appendix C of the original FEMA “Building Performance Study”, which was described by the New York Times as “perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation.”

–Ω–

The actual NIST investigation into 9/11 didn’t officially begin until Aug. 21, 2002. But the panel wasn’t official until the NCST (National Construction Safety Team) Act was signed into law on October 1, 2002, by President Bush. This act authorized the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to establish teams to investigate building failures. The final report on the collapses of WTC 1 and 2 was issued on Oct. 26, 2005. The investigation of the collapse of WTC 7 was completed separately in 2008. One must ask why it took over 365 days to start an official investigation into the most heinous crime in American history. The average time for starting investigations is 1 week. Just think of all the evidence that was lost and covered up in that more than 1-year time. On a personal note: I don’t think it was coincidence that it took NIST 4 and 7 years respectively to release these reports. By that time, by now, most people have or are ready to put the “whole 9/11 thing” behind them. While time doesn’t heal, it does remove the urgency. Thus, I’m sure that most people would have taken any report, no matter how improbable or ridiculous, as the official story. Not that they read it in the first place. But remember, the Patriot Acts and other tyrannical legislation, permissible torture, and indefinite detention without a trial, are law now because of this infamous event. And these laws and acts will affect every one of us eventually. And so, forgetting 9/11 or putting it behind us is not really an option now, is it?

–Ω–

In March of 2007, an extensive set of detailed architectural drawings of the World Trade Center became public through the actions of a whistleblower that worked for the Silverstein Group in 2002 that proved beyond any doubt that the official reports into the collapse of the towers misrepresented their construction. The blueprints provided consist of 261 drawings, included detailed plans for the North Tower (WTC 1), the World Trade Center foundation and basement, and the TV mast on top of the North Tower. The blueprints show that FEMA’s report was inaccurate in stating that core columns were “freestanding” when in fact large horizontal beams cross-connected the core columns in a three-dimensional matrix of thick steel. The NIST report into the collapses has also been proven inaccurate by the blueprints, proving the sixteen columns on the long faces of the cores shared the same dimensions for most of each Tower’s height. These omitted and distorted facts serve to render the official reports extremely questionable and deserving of a new and impartial investigation. Translation: these beams would have to be cut for the buildings to fall with almost no resistance, like they did.

–Ω–

More evidence of misleading and purposely misrepresented evidence was thus shown by FEMA and NIST. Prior to the release of the detailed architectural drawings in 2007, ‘9/11 Research’ published the Master Plan, dated December 16, 1963. This was a generic blueprint drawing of the WTC prior to its construction, which did not show structural details such as column dimensions. It did, however, show an arrangement of core columns that was later changed when the towers were constructed. The obsolete core column arrangement indicated in the “Master Plan” has been reproduced in other publications such as the book ‘Multi-Storey Buildings in Steel’. FEMA and NIST’s purposeful reference to these Master Plan drawings pre-dating construction, with the complicit knowledge of their inaccuracies and later changes are just more reasons to dismiss these investigations as fraud and fund a new independent investigation.

–Ω–

James Quintiere, Ph.D. – former Chief of the Fire Science Division of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), has called for an independent review of NIST’s investigation into the collapses of the World Trade Center Towers on 9/11. Dr. Quintiere made his plea during his presentation, “Questions on the WTC Investigations” at the 2007 World Fire Safety Conference. “I wish that there would be a peer review of this,” he said, referring to the NIST investigation. “I think all the records that NIST has assembled should be archived. I would really like to see someone else take a look at what they’ve done; both structurally and from a fire point of view… I think the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable… Let’s look at real alternatives that might have been the cause of the collapse of the World Trade Towers and how that relates to the official cause and what’s the significance of one cause versus another.” Dr. Quintiere is considered one of the world’s leading fire science researchers and safety engineers.

–Ω–

“Spoliation of a fire (crime) scene is a basis for destroying a legal case in an investigation. Most of the steel was discarded, although the key elements of the core steel were demographically labeled. A careful reading of the NIST report shows that they have no evidence that the temperatures they predict as necessary for failure are corroborated by findings of the little steel debris they have. Why hasn’t NIST declared that this spoliation of the steel was a gross error?” – Question posed to NIST by James Quintiere, Ph.D.

–Ω–

Each of the Twin Towers was pulverized, turned to dust, and totally destroyed in a matter of seconds. In the history of the world there has never been another instance of a steel framed building or skyscraper collapsing from fire. The first and second instance of this was recorded on September 11, 2001 with the collapse at freefall speed of the twin towers. The third instance of this was when WTC 7 collapsed at freefall speed into its own footprint that evening. No airplane had hit WTC 7. Explosions described by firefighters and eyewitnesses as bombs were reported just prior to the WTC 7 collapse.

–Ω–

In addition to the Twin Towers and WTC 7, the World Trade Center complex held buildings 3,4,5, and 6. All of these buildings were severely damaged, first by falling rubble from the twin tower collapses, and then by fires that burned for many hours throughout the entirety of the buildings. Though these buildings were severely thrashed almost beyond recognition, they did not collapse. Yet before collapsing, WTC 7 was hardly damaged at all from debris, and its fires were only sporadic on a few floors, and were oxygen starved (low temperature) throughout the building itself. How is this possible?

–Ω–

Prior to the 9/11 attacks, insiders trading “put options” were placed on United and American Airlines stocks between September 6th and September 10th 2001, at the Chicago Board of Options Exchange. “Put options” are bets that a stock will fall in value in the near future. The owner has the option of buying the stock at a lower rate and then selling them at the highest rate, thus earning a quick windfall profit. Also, a stock option usually costs only a fraction of the actual current stock price due to the risk of a total loss. The put options placed on the two airline stocks were reportedly six to eleven times higher than normal on these days. Other unusual “put option” activity was registered with three European reinsurance firms, Germany Re, Swiss Re, and AXA of France, in addition to World Trade Center occupant Morgan Stanley Dean Witter. This either means that these companies had insider information about the events of 9/11, or were told that their values would drop soon. Either way, this is illegal and treasonous. Martha Stewart has got nothing on these crooks!

–Ω–

At least 17 countries warned the United States regarding intelligence about an imminent attack on America prior to 9/11/01. The cover of the FEMA response manual printed in 1997 and titled, “Emergency Response to Terrorism: A Self-Study”, depicted the World Trade Centers’ twin towers in cross hairs. The Military District of Washington D.C. planned for and simulated a plane crash just like the Pentagon Attack in their “Operation Mascal” planning exercise on October 24, 2000. A Minnesota FBI agent investigating Zacarias Moussaoui testified that he notified the Secret Service weeks before Sept. 11 that a terror team might hijack a plane and “hit the nation’s capital.”

• “There, ah, were, ah, no warning signs that I’m aware of…– Robert S. Mueller, FBI Director under Bush, September 17, 2001, in a press conference.

• “I don’t think anybody could have predicted that they would try to use an airplane as a missile; a high-jacked airplane as a missile…” – Condoleezza Rice, as National Security Advisor in a press conference shortly after 9/11.

• “Nobody in our government at least, and I don’t think the prior government that could envision flying airplanes into buildings.” – George W. Bush, as President of the United States in a press conference, shortly after 9/11.

• “No specific threat involving really, ah, domestic operation or involving, ah, what happened obviously, ah, the cities, the airliners and so forth…Dick Cheney, as Vice-President, September 16th, in a television interview.

• “Regrettably, the tragic events of 9/11 were never anticipated or exercised.” – Gen. Ralph Eberhart, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and N.O.R.A.D. commander, as reported to USA Today.

USA Today reports that in the 2 years before the attacks of September 11th, N.O.R.A.D conducted exercises using high-jacked airliners as weapons, and one target was the world trade center.” – Peter Jennings, ABC News.

What the subject has in his mind is that he will board any American commercial aircraft pretending to be an ordinary passenger. Then he will hijack [the] said aircraft, control its cockpit and dive it at the CIA headquarters. Other buildings targeted: the Pentagon and the World Trade Center.” – Report dated January 20, 1995. Philippine police say this document and others outlining three terrorist plots were given to the FBI in 1995 after investigators here busted a terrorist cell. Two attacks — to assassinate the Pope and to bomb U.S. planes — were foiled, but parts of the last and most ambitious plan, Philippine police say, became reality six years later. Reported on CNN March 11, 2002.

 

–Ω–

When a crime has been committed, any good investigator would ask the question:

Who benefited? So… first, who didn’t benefit from 9/11?

Saddam Husain – lost his dictatorship, his country, his power, and was executed, not that he had anything to do with 9/11.

Osama Bin Laden – lost everything, including his freedom and the protection afforded him by the Taliban prior to 9/11. He’ll never be free again, and will have to hide forever. He can no longer visit other countries for medical care, since those countries would be accused of harboring a known fugitive and “terrorist”.

Al Qaeda – was created, funded and armed by the C.I.A. in the 1980’s for the purposes of fighting off a Russian invasion of Afghanistan. Since 9/11, this or any other group would find it impossible to carry out terrorist attacks anywhere in the world, since 9/11 was the catalyst for the Patriot Acts, which allow our government to spy and listen to any phone or computer communications without limit, including yours. This would seriously undermine any group’s ability to function as a terrorist cell.

In conclusion, all of the usual suspects of 9/11 gained absolutely nothing from 9/11. In fact… they lost everything.

–Ω–

So… Who then, actually benefited from 9/11?

Larry Silverstein – He became the leaseholder of the World Trade Center just a few weeks before 9/11, purchasing it for 15 million dollars. He inherited a mandatory asbestos removal problem, which would have cost over 1 billion dollars to complete in the buildings. Also, the twin towers had a low occupancy rate, with many offices un-rented. Before he signed the lease, Silverstein reworked the insurance policy to specifically cover “terrorist attacks”. After 9/11, he received 7 billion dollars as a settlement from his insurance policy. That’s a 6.85 billion dollar profit!

PNAC – This Neo-con manifesto, created and then published less than 12 months prior to 9/11, included the following goals: to transform America into tomorrows dominant force and global constabulary unchallenged by the U.N. and the rest of the world, to abandon the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, to establish permanent military bases in the Middle-East (against the constitution), regime change in countries like Iraq and Afghanistan, and almost all other goals stated in the manifesto which came to fruition only after 9/11. PNAC was like a playbook for the events following 9/11.

Dick Cheney and Halliburton – Former vice-president and former CEO of Halliburton, Dick Cheney still receives a multi-year differed salary package from Halliburton. In a major conflict of interest, this conglomerate company and its subsidiary KBR were granted multi-no-bid contracts in Iraq, Afghanistan, and at home. In Iraq, KBR leased $40,000 trucks for 5 years, each costing approximately $270,000 at the end of the lease, charged $100 per load of laundry for soldiers who weren’t allowed to do it themselves, and charged the Iraqi government as much as $25,000 per month for each of as many as 1,800 fuel trucks that were to deliver gasoline to Iraq after the 2003 invasion, though the trucks often spent days or weeks sitting idle on the border, and were abandoned in the desert for such things as flat tires. The company’s policy is called “cost-plus”, meaning that the more KBR spends, the more profit they make. KBR recently received a no-bid government contract to build internment camps in the United States as well. Halliburton’s stock has increased greatly since the invasions started. Dick Cheney was a member of the CFR – Council On Foreign Relations before becoming vice president and still working for Halliburton.

Bush and the Weapons Industry – Since the attacks on Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Pakistan, the weapons and arms industry has reaped billions of dollars in profits from military contracts and foreign buyers. With the goal being to continue the fighting and bombing as long as possible, as in Vietnam, the weapons industry will continue to make guns and bombs and sell them for huge profits to our government. The Bush family, as part of the Carlyle Group, has gained huge profits from the companies manufacture of weapons and military bases since 9/11.

Oil Companies – Over 60% of the world’s oil fields are in the Middle-East. The United States is by far the biggest consumer of this oil, bar none. Without gaining control of these oil fields, the U.S. economy would collapse, since oil is sold almost exclusively in dollars (petro-dollars) and not foreign currencies. It must control the supply to other countries as well, in order to keep the oil sold in dollars. U.S. oil interests have wanted to build an oil pipeline in the Middle-East since the 1980’s from the Caspian oil fields through Afghanistan. However, the occupying power in Afghanistan, the Taliban, would not allow this to be built. Only 1 day after the United States installed its own government into Afghanistan after 9/11, a contract was signed to construct this pipeline that the oil companies so desperately wanted.

The United States Government – 9/11 gave the elitists running our country inside and outside of our government the opportunity to establish unprecedented unconstitutional and tyrannical legislation in the form of The Patriot Acts. This act allows the government to spy on the communications of every citizen, to sample the DNA of any person convicted of any crime, and it allows for the arrest and indefinite detention of any citizen on suspicion, without a warrant, without probable cause, in secret, without notification of anyone including next of kin – and it takes away your right to a lawyer. Many other documents, acts, and laws have been passed that would never have been allowed prior to 9/11 and the “war on terror”, and which completely destroy the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, and even give the federal government new powers of regulation and jurisdiction over individual states. The Homeland Security agency was established after 9/11, and is now sponsoring the Boy and Girl Scouts of America, training them to fight domestic terrorism, similar to the Hitler Youth. By the way, we are all terrorists according to the Patriot Act! Also, please keep in mind that when you elect a President of the United States, you are not just voting for one man, you are voting for the hundreds of appointed (unelected) positions in the highest offices of government and beyond that this one man appoints. Chief of Staff, Secretary’s of State, Defense, Treasury, etc… All of these have conflicts of interest before being appointed, having worked in the industries they are selected to regulate, which is why no-bid contracts are awarded. Note: Obama’s largest campaign contributors were the banks that received the billions of dollars in “bail-outs” from the so-called financial crisis. This is politics; complete corporate corruption on a global scale.

–Ω–

“Project Achilles: Cell Phone Experiments in a Light Aircraft” – conducted by A.K. Dewdney. This was an experiment with several brands of cell phones and their call connection success rates at differing altitudes, up to 8,000 feet. Almost all of these phones failed to connect, or were unintelligible and dropped at this height. This is primarily due to the fact that cell phone towers extend and receive their signals horizontally, not vertically into the air – since there are no people floating around up there and angels have a direct line… Yet we are expected to believe that multiple, crystal clear calls were connected from 36,000 feet in the air, more than four times that tests altitude. This is impossible, as anybody who’s tried to make a call from cruising altitude with a cell phone can attest. Interestingly, on July 15, 2004, American Airlines installed its first cell phone-receiving station onto one of its jets. For the first time, passengers were able to make calls from 36,000 feet in the air. This was not possible on 9/11.

–Ω–

There are a surprising amount of companies and individuals who either appeared to have or admitted to have prior knowledge of the attacks of 9/11:

Zim American Israeli Shipping Co. broke a lease in order to vacate the World Trade Center just days before the attack. Zim’s lease extended through the end of the year and the termination cost was $50,000.

• At Odigo, the instant messaging service, two Israeli employees received e-mail messages two hours before the first World Trade Center assault, predicting the attack. Only 1 person of Israeli decent died that day.

San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown admitted to having received a warning not to fly on 9/11 from what he described as his airport security late Monday evening, just hours before the attack.

Salman Rushdie, who is under the continuous protection of Scotland Yard, was prevented from flying on September 11th, 2001.

Jim Pierce, cousin of President Bush, was scheduled to attend a conference on the 105th floor of the South Tower on 9/11/01, where his company’s New York offices were based. But the conference was moved across the street to the Millennium Hotel, because, the story goes, the group was too large for the WTC!

• Newsweek reported: On September 10… a group of top Pentagon officials suddenly cancelled travel plans for the next morning, apparently because of security concerns.

• According to the New York Times, Silverstein Properties had planned to meet on 9/11/01 on the 88th floor of one of the towers to “discuss what to do in the event of a terrorist attack,” but cancelled the meeting Monday night (9/10) “because one participant could not attend.”

–Ω–

On Sept. 10, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld declared war – but not on foreign terrorists… “The adversary’s closer to home. It’s the Pentagon bureaucracy,” he said. Rumsfeld said the money wasted by the military poses a serious threat. “In fact, it could be said it’s a matter of life and death,” said Rumsfeld. “According to some estimates we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions…” $2.3 trillion — that’s $8,000 for every man, woman and child in America. Rumsfeld promised change, but the next day on 9/11, the world changed – and in the rush to fund the new war on terrorism, the war on corruption and waste seems to have been forgotten.

–Ω–

Michael Chertoff was the second United States Secretary of Homeland Security under President George W. Bush, and co-author of the USA Patriot Act. After 9/11, the families of the victims from that day were given a choice. They could settle out of court, meaning quicker payouts for funerals and the raising of their families, as well as satiating their greed with something akin to instant gratification – or they could wage a costly court battle against the government, involving a lengthy investigation into the causes and culprits of 9/11. Option #2 would have taken a very long time, with no guarantees of financial rewards. Therefore, in the end, at least 97% of the victim’s families chose to settle out of court: choosing money instead of an proper investigation. Thanks to government lawyers like Chertoff, not a single plaintiff has been heard in court, and no government official has been charged with even gross negligence in the case of 9/11.

 

–Ω–

I could go on… and on… and on… and on… and on… but I think this is enough for our purposes. All we* want is a new investigation, by unbiased investigators, with no ties to any of the above mentioned groups, organizations, governments, or corporations, and with no financial compensation other than billed hours, under penalty of treason! Is that really so much to ask? We have all of this overwhelming evidence. Isn’t that enough?

 

* By we, I mean the group which has recently been dubbed the “Truthers” by the main-stream media. Somehow, the word ‘truth‘ was actually spun into having a negative connotation. This is how rediculously obscene our media has become… and it works! For when you hear the truth, your first thought is “oh, that’s just conspiracy theory!” No… it’s truth. Provable, documented, living truth. Perhaps this brainwashing works because of all the television stations, radio stations, movie production studios, newspapers, magazines, and other forms of mainstream media out there, almost all are all owned by a conglomerate of 6 differant companies. This is commonly reffered to as a monopoly – a monopoly with the most dier and purposeful of consequences… a completely ignorant public.

 

.

 

Clint Richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)

November 12, 2009

Czars: Unconstitutional, Unelected, Unofficial, And Unwanted!


There has been a lot of talk about the appointing of and use of Czars in the current Obama administration. Quite frankly, I had no idea what the connotation of this word was, nor what the historical power of that title really meant throughout history and today.

And so, being the ever-curious soul that I am, I did a bit of research.

I’d like to share that with you now:

(Emphasis mine throughout!)

What is a Czar?

According to the 1984 Webster’s New World Dictionary, Second College Edition – the term Czar is defined as:

Czar:

  1. An emperor: title of any of the former emperors of Russia, and at various times, the sovereigns of other Slavic nations.
  2. Any person having great or unlimited power over others; autocrat

Czarism:

  1. The Russian government under the Czars.
  2. Absolute rule; despotism

Hmmm… I don’t know about you, but that doesn’t sound very good to me. It certainly doesn’t sound like a Democracy or a Republic, where leaders are voted upon before entering office. And I refuse to believe that America has fallen so far as to be so ignorant of the past that their jaws don’t drop at the mere mention of the appointment of multiple “Czars” into their government.

Since this was a hard cover traditional dictionary from 1984 (a fitting year for this information, if you ask me) I thought this might be a biased, older, or out of date description of the word used to describe the people who are now advising our president.

So, I checked the Internet.

Here’s what I found there…

I went to Wikipedia, a site I would never use as a source of accurate information, but one none the less that many people do, despite it’s ability to be changed by even the most moronic of its users. But I figure that at least this is the going public opinion of what a Czar might be. Never the less, after some fact-checking… here’s what it said:

Tzar or Czar (Bulgarian, Russian, Ukrainian, Serbian): Term with Bulgarian origins used to designate certain monarchs. The first ruler to adopt the title tsar was Simeon I of Bulgaria.

Originally, the title Czar (derived from Caesar) meant Emperor in the European medieval sense of the term, that is, a ruler who claims the same rank as a Roman emperor, with the approval of another emperor or a supreme ecclesiastical official (the Pope or the Ecumenical Patriarch).

Occasionally, the word could be used to designate other, non-Christian, supreme rulers. In Russia and Bulgaria the imperial connotations of the term were blurred with time and, by the 19th century, it had come to be viewed as an equivalent of King.

“Tsar” was the official title of the supreme ruler in the following states:

  • Bulgaria in 913–1018, in 1185–1422 and in 1908–1946
  • Serbia in 1346–1371
  • Russia from about 1547 until 1721 (replaced in 1721 by imperator, but remained in common usage until 1917).

Under the heading “Metaphorical Uses” Wiki-Pedia states:

Like many lofty titles, e.g. Mogul, Tsar or Czar has been used as a metaphor for positions of high authority, in English since 1866 (referring to U.S. President Andrew Johnson), with a connotation of dictatorial powers and style, fitting since “Autocrat” was an official title of the Russian Emperor (informally referred to as ‘the Tsar’). Similarly, Speaker of the House Thomas Brackett Reed was called “Czar Reed” for his dictatorial control of the House of Representatives in the 1880s and 1890s.

In the United States the title “czar” is a slang term for certain high-level civil servants, such as the “drug czar” for the director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, “terrorism czar” for a Presidential advisor on terrorism policy, “cybersecurity czar” for the highest-ranking Department of Homeland Security official on computer security and information security policy, and “war czar” to oversee the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. More specifically, a czar refers to a sub-cabinet level advisor within the executive branch of the U.S. government.

Under the political term explanation page, WikiPedia states the following:

Rationale:

Advantages cited for the creation of czar type posts are the ability to go outside of formal channels and find creative solutions for ad hoc problems, the ability to involve a lot of government players in big issue decision-making, and the ability to get a huge bureaucracy moving in the right direction. Problems can occur with getting all the parties to work together and with managing competing power centers.

One explanation for use of the term is that while the American public rebels at terms like “king” and “dictator”, associating them with King George III or fascist figures of World War II, the term “czar” is foreign, distant, and exotic enough to be acceptable. And the fact that czar positions are often created in times of perceived public crisis makes the public eager to see a strong figure making hard decisions that the existing political structure is unable to do.[6] Another is that Americans of the era adopted exotic Asian words to denote those with great, and perhaps unchecked, power, with “mogul” and “tycoon” being other instances.

The increase in czar positions over time may be because as the size and role of the federal government has grown, so too has the difficulty of coordinating policy across multiple organizational jurisdictions. Indeed, czar positions sometimes become important enough that they become permanent executive offices, such as the Office of National Drug Control Policy or the United States Trade Representative.

Wow! So how many Czars do we have now?

Well, buckle your seatbelts… for in July of 2009, The Daily Citizen reported that:

“It has taken President Barack Obama less than eight months to do what imperial Russia could not do in 400 years.

“Taxpayers for Common Sense reports that: Obama has appointed 31 “czars.” That’s more than ruled Russia during its entire imperial history.


“Obama has appointed a California water czar, a Mideast peace czar and a Mideast policy czar, a pay czar (to determine how much the private sector should pay, not the government), a health care czar, an energy czar and a green jobs czar, a Sudan czar, a climate change czar and numerous others, with the promise of more to come. And, if you can’t keep track of all the czars, don’t worry. Obama has also appointed an information czar.

“… Few of these czars require any congressional approval, but Obama has given many of them power over cabinet-level officials who are subject to confirmation.

(Source: The Daily Citizen –  http://www.northwestgeorgia.com/opinion/local_story_189163602.html?keyword=topstory)

Steve Forbes is quoted while speaking about Czars:

“It underscores the inefficiency of government that you keep … having people, hoping that maybe they will get something done that the massive government bureaucracy cannot.”

(Source: “Questions Raised Over Influence of Obama ‘Czars'”. Fox News. July 13, 2009. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/13/questions-raised-influence-obama-czars/)

So who is paying these “Czars” salaries?

Why the taxpayers of course!

How much power do these Czars actually have?

Good question… As stated by the Daily Citizen above:

Few of these czars require any congressional approval, but Obama has given many of them power over cabinet-level officials who are subject to confirmation.

So much apparent power do these Czars have, that Rep. Jack Kingston [Republican-GA] introduced a bill – H.R. 3226: Czar Accountability and Reform (CZAR) Act of 2009 – on July 15, 2009. Apparently this bill is so important to the members of the House of Representatives that it currently has 116 co-sponsors, all of them Republican. The one co-sponsor that was a Democrat was withdrawn at some point. When the whole of the Republican Party, including my personal hero Ron Paul supports a bill, which would reign in the Democratic President and party, one should not take such legislation lightly. The same would be true in opposite party circumstances. See the contents of the bill here:

(http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-3226)

The main concern here, one that is generally lost on the American people, is that these Czars are appointed without Congressional or Senate approval by one person: the President Of The United States. This alone should be enough to warrant extreme caution about the man who is for all intents and purposes in charge of our country (or more correctly: the man who signs the legislation and corrupt laws in the stead of lobbyists and wealthy elite bankers and corporations who funded his campaign and are incrementally taking control of our country). For the appointment of these men and women, of whom many have considerably tarnished and controversial political, economic, populist, and global oriented views, is a violation of the governmental and constitutional values we once held so dear to our hearts.

President Obama continues to keep in place and head the advice of such Czars as Paul Holdren – the “science czar” who co-wrote the book Ecoscience – “which proposed and supported such ideals as “compulsory sterilization,” and the creation of a “Planetary Regime” that would oversee human population levels and control all natural resources as a means of protecting the planet.” (infowars.com). Strangely, these ideals were not brought to light in Holdren’s Senate confirmation hearings. Unfortunately, this begs the assumption that the Senate is equally complicate in the appointment and support of these Czars, whether they are approved or not.

In conclusion, Obama appears to be out of control! While the gullible masses who support him are still admonishing him as the Savior of America, his empty promises of “hope and change” continue to ring – like a false Liberty Bell, whose crack is ever-widening and is about to break in half, along with this now condemned and nearly broken country. These Czars are the specters of false prophets; ghouls who resemble the character portrayal of Worm-tongue from the Lord of the Rings trilogy. And I for one am sickened by the ill-boded direction our electorate has taken towards the support of these tyrannical and unconstitutional, unelected rulers.

Quite frankly, the words of a fictional but oh so relevant news anchor perhaps best suit the stance we should all be taking towards the president and these unelected psychopaths who advise him…

I’m mad as hell, and I’m not going to take it anymore!

.

Clint Richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
October 5, 2009