Murder suicide??? I'm not buying that "official" description of such for a nanosecond. Phil Marshall was an intelligent, rational individual, professional pilot, and certainly had credibility in his observations and theories about what really happened leading up to and during the 9/11 "incident".
He was taken out, along with his family. A more blatantly clear message could not be more obvious. This was a warning to any and all who may want to continue challenging the supposedly accepted 9/11 "attack" story.
But hideous as this is, such threatening acts of tyranny have a way of backfiring.
To me, this indicates how evermore desperate the real architects of this entire 9/11 debacle, the PNAC agenda and their minions, are becoming to protect their treasonous, criminal enterprises.
This is not going to scare people away from finding the truth, and exposing such to the world.
Quite the contrary, I would suggest this will further harden the resolve of those who are determined to bring this truth to light, for all to see.
Madsen has some twenty years experience in security issues. As a U.S. Naval Officer, he managed one of the first computer security programs for the U.S. Navy. He subsequently worked for the National Security Agency, the Naval Data Automation Command, Department of State, RCA Corporation, and Computer Sciences Corporation. Madsen was a Senior Fellow for the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), a privacy public advocacy organization.
Madsen is a member of the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) and the National Press Club.
http://waynemadsenreport.com/categories/20070329
Phil Marshall cast much suspicion on Porter Goss in his most recent book “The Big Bamboozle”. Goss (who was later appointed to CIA Director by President Bush, only to mysteriously resign shortly afterwards, no reason given) was one of those present at that infamous breakfast meeting at the Capitol, on the morning of September 11, 2001, with General Mahmoud Ahmad, head of the Pakistani ISI. According to the FBI, Indian Intelligence and several press reports, the Mahmoud Ahmad was instrumental in providing financial support to the 9/11 terrorists. Ahmad had allegedly ordered the transfer of $100,000 to the presumed 9/11 ring-leader Mohamed Atta.
At that September 11 meeting were three lawmakers Bob Graham, Porter Goss and Jon Kyl who were part of the Congressional delegation to Pakistan. Also present at this meeting were Pakistan’s ambassador to the U.S. Maleeha Lodhi and several members of the Senate and House Intelligence committees. This meeting was described by one press report as a “follow-up meeting” to that held in Pakistan in late August.
After the Capitol meeting, Porter Goss went to the Pentagon where he is seen being interviewed, on camera, by the mainstream US media, while the attack sequence was still being played out. This video gives us some evidence regarding what happened at the Pentagon, as Goss was speaking: There is a distant boom, and people in camerashot turn around and gasp. Then, a minute later, we hear the sound of a large commercial plane flying full throttle, engines screaming, and people look towards where the sound is coming from. There were TWO events at the Pentagon that morning, and Porter Goss likely knows exactly what happened, and who was responsible – and Phil Marshall was onto Porter Goss.
Watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q44verk-cwM (before youtube pulls it, yet again).
From Bloggulator http://www.santabarbaraview.com/phi...m-of-one4254252/comment-page-2/#comment-24784
More Porter Goss:
Bomb Goes Off At Pentagon During Porter Goss Q&A
Do we have flt 77 on tape finally?
What is that explosion before the screaming jet noise? Is that screaming jet noise Flt 77?
Inquiring minds want to know...
More Porter Goss:
Bomb Goes Off At Pentagon During Porter Goss Q&A
Do we have flt 77 on tape finally?
What is that explosion before the screaming jet noise? Is that screaming jet noise Flt 77?
Inquiring minds want to know...
More Porter Goss:
Bomb Goes Off At Pentagon During Porter Goss Q&A
Do we have flt 77 on tape finally?
What is that explosion before the screaming jet noise? Is that screaming jet noise Flt 77?
Inquiring minds want to know...
Suppose that is possible . . . but if so it will soon be discovered . . .I'd like to see an longer copy of that. The sound at the end sounds out of place, like creative editing.
So you think local police are covering up 9/11? How many people are involved then? Millions?
Admittedly going from hollywood lol... 'It comes from the top... this is a murder suicide... wrap it up quick or there will be trouble and you will be back directing traffic'.How do they stop the police from whistle blowing?
Police are suspicious by nature and training. The point being made is that to 'cover it up', means someone needs to give them a reason, and since the base reason here is 9/11, that is why the comment was made.
The elaborate conspiracies that I see being pushed by the 9/11 folks would need thousands to cover them up. And that is where they fall apart for me. Thousands of folks were touched personally by 9/11, in fact while I didn't lose any one there, my Brother in Law was in a plane headed for DC that day. (He was scheduled to appear before a confirmation hearing the next day---he had been appointed as Assistant Secretary of the Interior ). Because of that simple fact, there are tens of thousands of folks that have a personal investment in the facts and the truth of what happened that day. There would be hundreds of 'whistle blowers', some with intimate knowledge of portions of the story. Instead I see a handful of folks that have minor, if any real links to the 'cover up'.
It is probably too early to say the police were/are incompetent or part of a cover-up but many, many people will be second guessing them no matter what they do. . . .so if I were them I would make very, very sure I did everything correct to the letter . . if not they will probably deserve the criticism they could very well get !!!!!So you think local police are covering up 9/11? How many people are involved then? Millions?
How do they stop the police from whistle blowing?
1.
7. The gun marshall allegedly used to kill his children and one of their pets, a shitzu dog, found dead in one of the bedrooms as the children "appeared to be sleeping" in the living room was found behind his back as he laid dead on the floor after appearing to have shot himself. According to a friend of his in a post at the http://calaverasenterprise.com, he had joked about having the gun but no bullets for it. Why no bullets? One possibility is because he had kids and intended the weapon to be a 'deterrent' rather than to actully kill anyone.
I have one question then a comment. Question: What is the status of his book? I believe the answer is very important for obvious reasons. Maybe it will in the hands of his wife.
What 'conspiracy' that required thousands of non military folks went 'uncovered' for years? I am not aware of any. Even things like Iran Contra were uncovered within a couple of years. It was very high level and did not require thousands of accomplices.
What 'conspiracy' that required thousands of non military folks went 'uncovered' for years? I am not aware of any. Even things like Iran Contra were uncovered within a couple of years. It was very high level and did not require thousands of accomplices.
Well, it was not a real conspiracy, but a military plan, by the Imperial German government, under Kaiser Wilhelm II, to invade the US, that went unknown for almost a century.
Let's look at the 'cover up':Contra militants based in Honduras waged a guerilla war to topple the then-Marxist government of Nicaragua.[14][15] The Contras' form of warfare was "one of consistent and bloody abuse of human rights, of murder, torture, mutilation, rape, arson, destruction and kidnapping".[16][17] The "Contras systematically engage in violent abuses...so prevalent that these may be said to be their principal means of waging war".[18] A Human Rights Watch report found that the Contras were guilty of targeting health care clinics and health care workers for assassination; kidnapping civilians; torturing and executing civilians, including children, who were captured in combat; raping women; indiscriminately attacking civilians and civilian homes; seizing civilian property; and burning civilian houses in captured towns.[19]
Direct funding of the Contras insurgency had been made illegal through the Boland Amendment,[7] the name given to three U.S. legislative amendments between 1982 and 1984 aimed at limiting U.S. government assistance to the Contras militants. In violation of the Boland Amendment, senior officials of the Reagan administration continued to secretly arm and train the Contras and provide arms to Iran, an operation they called "the Enterprise".[20]
The investigation was impeded when large volumes of documents relating to the scandal were destroyed or withheld from investigators by Reagan administration officials.[10]
And let's look at how it was uncovered:The scandal was compounded when Oliver North destroyed or hid pertinent documents between November 21 and November 25, 1986
Seemed pretty secure from the U.S side... No leaks there... Where were all these whistle blowers you claim would be rushing out to expose everything. Nowhere! Good damage limitation and maximum cover up though, documents disposed of efficiently etc!After a leak by Iranian Mehdi Hashemi, the Lebanese magazine Ash-Shiraa exposed the arrangement on November 3, 1986.[50] This was the first public reporting of the weapons-for-hostages deal. The operation was discovered only after an airlift of guns was downed over Nicaragua. Eugene Hasenfus, who was captured by Nicaraguan authorities, initially alleged in a press conference on Nicaraguan soil that two of his coworkers, Max Gomez and Ramon Medina, worked for the Central Intelligence Agency.[51] He later said he did not know whether they did or not.[52] The Iranian government confirmed the Ash-Shiraa story, and ten days after the story was first published,
Not a lot of consequence then... No 'war crimes'... no long prison sentences. No disincentive to do it all again. Bit like the Shah of Iran really... 'milk the cow as long as you can and if the SHTF, good ol U.S of A will look after you'Several investigations ensued, including those by the U.S. Congress and the three-person, Reagan-appointed Tower Commission. Neither found any evidence that President Reagan himself knew of the extent of the multiple programs.[2][3][7] In the end, fourteen administration officials were indicted, including then-Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger. Eleven convictions resulted, some of which were vacated on appeal.[12] The rest of those indicted or convicted were all pardoned in the final days of the presidency of George H. W. Bush, who had been vice-president at the time of the affair.[13]
In 1994, North unsuccessfully ran for the United States Senate as the Republican Party candidate in Virginia. Republican Senator John Warner of Virginia endorsed Marshall Coleman, a Republican who ran as an independent, instead of North. On the eve of the election, former first lady Nancy Reagan told a reporter that North had lied to her husband when discussing Iran–Contra with the former president, effectively stopping his campaign. North lost by a 46% to 43% margin to incumbent Democrat Charles Robb,[19] a son-in-law of President Lyndon B. Johnson. Coleman received 11%. North's candidacy was documented in the 1996 film A Perfect Candidate.[13]
5. Probably exactly one day before the Marshall family died (Jan 30), Mr. Marshall posted an article entitled "THE ARAB WORLD KNOWS THE RAID WAS A HOAX". As anyone who uses online utilities to shorten urls, the codes cannot link to a non-existent article. However RT.com (Russia Today, a media outlet supported financially by the Russian government) has pulled the article.
This is what should have been linked.
http://rt.com/art-and-culture/news/murdoch-zero-dark-thirty-925/
And if you go to that link, you might just do exactly what it says at the top left side of the page. "Question More".
How many folks in the US knew about this? Not a lot. A few folks overseas, and there was a leak. For any of the elaborate plots that the 9/11 truthers have but forth, it would take thousands of folks covering up things. For a year or two, that might be be slightly feasible, but for over 10, nope it isn't.
When there is a real conspiracy, all the leaks start lining up, they don't on 9/11. Too many conflicting stories.
Absolute rubbish and bunk. No more people need to know about 9/11 than knew about Iran Contra.
Had it not leaked out from abroad... we would likely not even be talking about it.
It's been linked too several times in a number of discussions in which you've participated Cairen, but you might want to look at MKUltra again: a CIA program, with the support of once-Nazi scientists, which used LSD, electroshock, torture practices, and abuse of a physical and sexual nature, sometimes secretly and often without any consent, on a great number of American and Canadian citizens, including children. This went on for nearly thirty years before it was finally exposed and a stop was put too it. Nearly 30 years of the physical, moral, and sexual abuse of citizens of north America, children included, conducted by an organization who's supposed mandate is the protection of those people. Rather than be disbanded when this practice was revealed, the CIA is more powerful today than it ever was, even though it's historical fact that they perpetrated some of the most shameful human-rights abuses to ever be leveled against American and Canadian citizens in the modern world.
The difference here is that 9/11 resulted in building collapsing, thousands of deaths. That was intended.
They also knew there would be an investigation.
As covered in the previous section of this paper, defenders of the 'official story' consistently say that a conspiracy of 9/11's magnitude would be impossible to pull off. That though perhaps dishonest and unlawful, not even the Bush regime would stoop this low. That Americans don't kill Americans, that governments don't have the sophistication to pull 'conspiracies' like this off, that there would be a definitive whistleblower, etc. etc. All of these comments are understandable. September 11 is a confusing and emotionally volatile subject, and suggesting that the government may have been involved only amplifies the confusion and emotionality. But unfortunately, general statements of belief in regards to one's personal assessment as to what the U.S. government would or would not do has nothing to do with answering the evidence uncovered by a reasonable investigation into the actual event.
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." - Former CIA Director William Colby
Cheney and Bush fought hard to not investigate the events of 9/11 for more than a year. Why?
The 9/11 Commission received a paltry $15 million for their 'investigation'. Compare that to the $40 million given to investigate Bill Clinton's oral sex escapade
The Commission was headed by Thomas Kean, director of oil giant Amerada Hess, co-chairman of Homeland Security Project, and a man with strong business ties to Saudis Khalid bin Mahfouz. Hardly a man likely to seriously challenge the Bush/Cheney (fellow oilmen) conclusions hammered into the public's consciousness over the previous year. Moreover, the executive director of the Commission, and the man in charge of determining its use of funds, direction of inquiry, etc., was Philip Zelikow. This is a man who wrote a book with Condaleeza Rice, now acts as one of her senior advisors, was a member of George W. Bush's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, and a member of the Bush-Cheney transition team after their first election. The conflicts of interest are glaringly obvious, and Philip Zelikow was hardly the man equipped for the hard-nosed, deliberate investigation 9/11 so deserved. (For a quick general overview of the rest of the Commission and their inherent inability to do any kind of serious, probing investigation,
Intended? Huge shock that was intended to enrage and terrorise the gullible into endorsing illegal wars and regime changes based on garbage and insidious, carefully woven and emotive lies.
...the apparent lack of photographic 'evidence'...
I noticed that he failed to offer any proof of his allegation of 30 years of sexual abuse of children by the CIA. Can we see that please?
None of this prepared people for the explosive testimony made on March 15, 1995, in Washington, D.C., before the President's Committee on Radiation, however. In unpublicized sessions, New Orleans therapist Valerie Wolf introduced two of her patients who had uncovered memories of being part of extensive CIA brainwashing programs as young children (in one case, starting at age seven). Their brainwashing included torture, rape, electroshock, powerful drugs, hypnosis and death threats. According to their testimony, the CIA then induced amnesia to prevent their recalling these terrifying sessions.
MKultra is a well known CIA coverup. Though most of the documentation was destroyed by the CIA, they've admitted to a large number of the crimes committed, including surreptitiously dosing people with LSD and other mind-altering drugs, attempting hypnosis, sensory deprivation, isolation, verbal and sexual abuse while people are in drugged out states, and engaging in all sorts of forms of torture on US, Canadian, and Mexican citizens, often with no consent. The accusation that children were involved comes from the apparent victims themselves.
http://vimeo.com/26848915
Recovered memories are terrible evidence.
Are you really saying that MK Ultra is a good example of a cover up, on par with 9/11? Would you say the comparison holds for a full blown controlled demolition cover up, or just a much less involved "helped it happen" conspiracy of dodgy dealings with Pakistan etc?
One can always reduce a proposed conspiracy to such a level that a cover up is plausible. The question is, what do you think that level is. What is being covered up?
The memories weren't recovered through hypnosis/regression/other forms of 'suggestion'. If someone testifying as to what they remember about an incident is terrible evidence, then most witness testimonies are terrible evidence, as they're all usually dependent on memory.Recovered memories are terrible evidence.
Are you really saying that MK Ultra is a good example of a cover up, on par with 9/11? Would you say the comparison holds for a full blown controlled demolition cover up, or just a much less involved "helped it happen" conspiracy of dodgy dealings with Pakistan etc?
One can always reduce a proposed conspiracy to such a level that a cover up is plausible. The question is, what do you think that level is. What is being covered up?
Well stated . . . I don't know if I would go so far as to say . . . "I'm of the opinion elements of the CIA were complicit in the 9/11 attacks. The extent of that complicity I'm uncertain of, but there's little doubt in my mind really."The memories weren't recovered through hypnosis/regression/other forms of 'suggestion'. If someone testifying as to what they remember about an incident is terrible evidence, then most witness testimonies are terrible evidence, as they're all usually dependent on memory.
MKultra is an excellent example of a coverup. Is it 'on par with 9/11'? No, not really, especially considering it's been, at least to a small extent, 'uncovered'. None the less, it's a clear, distinct, indisputable example of the CIA, an intelligence organization that's supposed to protect Americans, taking extreme and frightening liberties with their power to do things any decent person would immediately identify as being sick and wrong. It's also not the only example of this sort of callous and alarming behavior by the CIA. If an organization with a long history of trampling all over the human rights of not only people abroad, but also its own citizens, not only survives but thrives in a democratic setting, one has to wonder at just how 'democratic' that setting really is, and if 'the people' really have any solid say in the management of their country. MKultra has little to do with 9/11 directly, but it establishes that one of the primary institutions in which America places its trust where National Security and investigating 9/11 is concerned has by no means demonstrated itself as trustworthy, and are, if their history is any indication, entirely willing to not only lie too/mislead Americans, but also violate their rights.
I'm of the opinion elements of the CIA were complicit in the 9/11 attacks. The extent of that complicity I'm uncertain of, but there's little doubt in my mind really.