I found this article today.
I thought it was a very fair piece of journalism and one that may even be the green shoots of the MSM beginning to question the OS?
Maybe not, but certainly bringing attention to a number of the anomolies relating to that most infamous of days, as well as mentioning some key names.
And bringing this to the attention of everyday folk, here in the U.K.
And from Starbucks, I went down the rabbit hole. I found myself at a conference on Walker Street called 'How The World Changed After 9/11'. It was
packed, but I managed to slide in at the back, to hear a guy called Webster Tarpley chant his own list of names. The names of the 46 military
exercises and hijack drills (called things like 'Vigilant Guardian') that were actually taking place on the morning of September 11. "The greatest
density of drills in US military history," Tarpley said.
The journalist covers the number of drills that were taking place and why the reaction to the actual events unfolding was not what the American people
should have expected.
Fake radar blips, dummy hijacks, dummy attacks, fighter jets sent off to Turkey, the skies left unprotected, with the FBI's top anti-terror experts
stuck on a training exercise in California. The drills, said Tarpley, were important, because not only did they weaken and confuse US air defence, but
there was also a military drill for each major component of the 9/11 attacks. The drills were cover, and the dummy threats were made real.
There were a number of key speakers including an ex CIA analyst called Ray McGovern. I think he brought along one of the more revealing facts.
He drew attention to an extraordinary story, barely touched by the mainstream press, that Richard Clarke, who was the White House counter-terrorism
czar at the time of the attacks, has recently accused the CIA of deliberately suppressing information before 9/11, information that might have
prevented the attacks. Clarke claimed: "There was a high-level decision in the CIA ordering people not to share information." And who made this
decision? "I would think it would have been made by the director".
At the end of the article the Journalist suggests that people should do some of their own research on some of the names mentioned during the speeches,
pointing to the fact that Googling Cass Sunstein might be a good starting point.
We have to do something. Even if that something is simply to Google 'Cass Sunstein' and start from there. Begin your own cognitive infiltration.
Google 'Vigilant Guardian' or 'Able Danger'. Crosscheck 'Abdel Hakim Belhadj' and 'Al-Qaida'. Begin digging. Begin thinking. And stop
believing.
At last a MSM article not calling all Truthers 'Loony Tunes'. Take a look at the article and see what you think.
www.guardian.co.uk...