Continuing MSM absorption of "9/11 - Inside Job"

[theSaiGirl]

"New York Magazine" hedges its bets, with a hesitantly cosmopolitan skepticism of the official government big media plot-line:

"Nineteen crazed hijackers with box-cutters - masterminded by a rich dialysis patient, on a lap-top, from a specially-outfitted "bat-cave" - built for him by the CIA, decades ago, in lower Afghanistan .."
An initial script scenario, rich in potential for dramatic episodic sequels...
http://nymag.com/news/features/16464/index.html
"New York Magazine" .. perhaps read by a more "New York-ish" slice of the population.

Then we have CNN's more flashy (and decidedly lower middle-class) "Showbiz Tonite" .. with the young and earnest AJ Hammer.
Continued blowback from CNN Showbiz broadcasts of Charlie Sheen and Alex Jones:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0603/22/sbt.01.html
http://www.911blogger.com/2006/03/911-skeptics-receive-fair-shake-on.html
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2006/200306charliesheen.htm
http://www.bant-shirts.com/Blog.htm

FOX, on the other hand, provides a dialectical counter-point to CNN's "entertainment" containment of 9/11-Inside-Job,
At FOX, we get the preferred, programmed and sanctioned "opposition":
Trotting out professional tenured academic hack, fake "native American" and 9/11 sheep-dipper Ward Churchill, to defend the official government-media narrative with a trendy "anti-racist" line:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,190967,00.html
....

Webster Tarpley sees the recent mainstreaming of 9/11 as a factional split among global gangster elites, some of whom seek to off-load the failures of Iraq, the "war on terror", and the dollar, onto Cheney-Bush; in preparation for their smooth replacement by more "left"-packaged globalist
clique .. perhaps the Democrats.

I would like to open this thread as a discussion of all the possible "modified limited hangouts", that might be spun to "absorb" the meme of "controlled demolition" - since I see the latter concept, with respect to WTC7, especially, as an increasingly common conventional wisdsom; as in, for example, the contemptuous "magic bullet" meme.
The "magic bullet" now reigns culturally hegemonic in American popular history today; I predict a similar status for the "controlled demolition" meme, with respect to WTC7, and, implicitly, the Towers.

The challenge/exercise that I propose to iniitate in this thread, is the measured and careful construction of plausible "limited hangouts", for the controlled demos of WTC7 at minimum; and the Towers at maximum (worst case scenario for a "magic plane" in lieu of a "magic bullet").

For example ...

We might have a LIHOP scenario placing Larry Silverstein, Marvin Bush's firm, Giuliani, Kerik.. and a host of insurance scam artists; making off with the gold stocks from the WTC vaults (never officially accounted for) ; or simply cashing in on the insurance, clean-up and re-development of the decontaminated grounds.

Or, we might have controlled demos spun as part of a larger "rogue element operation"; perhaps blackmailing the bumbling and incompetent Cheney-Bush syndicate.
The Mossad and "dancing Israelis", especially the ones who were living down the street from the designated patsies at Pensacola Naval Air Station; they could figure into a scenario for "the Israelis did it".

Or,we could have a "limited MIHOP"; with renegade swindlers and gangsters in America's political and corporate elites, staging the controlled demos, while infiltrating and "hijacking" a Pentagon-run sequence of "war games" and exercises, on the morning of 9/11 ....
perhaps infiltrated by Al-CIA-duh, who then craftily exploited holes in the "war games"; duping and outwitting our multi-trillion-dollar hi-tech NORAD and DoD infrastructure ... kind of like a typical plot-line from "24". .... probably wouldn't rate too highly on the plausibility scale.
Grade-B maybe ..?

Now .. the challenge here (students and friends), is to come up with truly "believable" hangouts and cover-stories ...
As in, at least as plausible as some of the "inside jobs", demonstrated on shows like "24"; just how high a standard of believability would that be ?

A better standard to use: pretend that you are employed to craft such modified limted hangouts, within a professional, foundation, corporate or government-run damage-control agency (Public Relations).

You can run a series of half-assed, hastily contrived hangouts, disposing of each successively, as it is publicly discredited and laughed at; thus stalling and sidetracking public opinion .. while putting together a more robust cover story, that would allow for controlled demolition, without "bringing the roof down" (on the Rule of Law of legitimacy of institutions) ... so to speak.

The already-existing constraint, seems to have Bush-Cheney blamed, scape-goated, or, in some other manner, "sacrificed", in a plausible, orderly manner; perhaps a more elaborately staged "9/11 Commission-style" impeachment proceeding ...
Could "failure and incompetence" be interwoven into a fall-back position of "WTC7 controlled demo on 9/11" ?

I do request that anyone professinally employed in Hollywood, who already has some paid script-development experience on these kinds of projects,whether in film, video or popular literature; please disclose any professional advantage in your background (as a kind of contest "handi-cap"), when submitting your modified limited hangout scenario....

Looking forward to all of your suggestions ..

[Peter Frank]

1. Per Your Request for Suggestions...

...I suggest that you work on one tack at a time.

Clearly you have a grasp of a number of issues; but you dilute your efforts by trying to present everything at once. Internally prioritize. Take your best single shot for the time & stick with it -- until it's time for the next appropriate shot.

[HamdenRice]

2. There can be no "modified limited hangout" on 9/11

Hi SaiGirl, I think I understand your question differently from Peter Frank. I assume you threw out all those scenarios to ask, what "story" could be disclosed about 9/11 LIHOP/MIHOP that could both throw Bush-Cheney overboard, but preserve the larger militiary intelligence infrastructure capable of 9/11.

I'm generally skeptical of the "limited hangout" theory in general, but I'll take a crack at your question this way:

I don't think that the current system could survive the widespread disclosure and acceptance by the majority of the American public that there was government complicity in 9/11 at either the LIHOP or MIHOP levels. If you were not alive and at least old enough to be a cognizant child or pre-teen in the late 1960s to early 1970s, it is difficult to imagine just what American society looks like when there has been a huge deligitimizing event. In the 1960s to mid 1970s, this happened as a result of a number of devastating public events: the resistance in the south to the widely accepted, morally superior claims of the civil rights movement; the Vietnam war, the widespread recognition that the US was both morally wrong and losing; Watergate and the revelation of a vast array of crimes committed at the highest levels of government.

Sometime later, I when I was in college, working in a library, I was given an assignment to help a professor with a research project. I was asked to printout the first page of the New York Times for almost every day of some year, I think it was 1970. It was sobering. The US Army deteriorated in Vietnam to the point that soldiers simply would not go out on patrol or follow orders. There was a violent riot somewhere in America almost every day from around 1969 to about 1972.And that was just the surface issue. There were small violent underground organizations, such as the Panthers, the Weathermen and the FALN, setting off bombs around the country. And those were the semi-rational underground organizations; bizarre, violent offshoot organizations like the Symbionese Liberation Army or Charles Manson's "family" terrorized cities.

This was all the result of the fact that the US government had been completely deligitimized. The elites decided that they would never let that happen again and through the media launched this campaign that it was unacceptable to criticize the basic premises of our society and that the media would not probe beneath the surface of events.

If 9/11 were demonstrated to have happened as a result of government complicity, the results would be a lot like the late 1960s-1970s. The difference would be that while the 60s divided the country on left right grounds, 9/11 fits into the pre-existing rational paranoia of both the left and the far right. Bush-Cheney would be thrown overboard, but so would a substantial chunk of the political system.

I don't believe that the media would necessarily be able to contain the information coming out about 9/11, but I don't know where this leads. This would be uncharted territory.

[theSaiGirl]

3. Some useful insights and broader historical perspective

Thanks for some sharp and cogent hypotheses.

I am 54, and helped organize many of those demonstrations against the Vietnam War; as well as being deeply involved in other "radical" efforts of that period (union organizing, welfare rights organizing, defense of minority organizations like the Black Panthers, etc.)

My next challenge: Factor in the tremendous social and cultural changes in American society, since the 60s and 70s.
We are clearly NOT living in the same country that we lived in back then.

To me, it appears that they have tested the waters, well in advance of 9/11, to determine just how much outrage they can get away with.

Consider the non-response to what happened at Waco.
Or the discernable shoulder-shrugging and "let's move on" attitude to the release of Oliver Stone's "JFK", the latter only acknowledging what most baby-boomers knew and ALREADY ACCEPTED about the reality of the political assassinations of the 60s - that they were essentially "inside jobs".

People simply shrugged and moved on with their trifling little lives.
Move on folks ... nothing new to see here ...

Or the failure to question the strange circumstances and incongruities surrounding both the 1993 "attack" on the WTC (apparently facilitated by and FBI infiltrator into the blind sheiks's inner circle); and the bombing of the Murrah Building in OKC (co-ordinated from the BATF annex at Elohim City).

In short: the standard of "legitimacy" that you refer to, sufficient to destabilize institutions and authority figures in today's America, is very, very different today, than it was then.
Post-Watergate, just how much does "legitimacy of authority" matter anymore ?

We have to account for the cumulative "cynicism" factor.

I claim that people already "know", on some intuitive level, that 9/11 was either partially or entirely an "inside job" ... and they have accepted it and moved on with their lives.

When would it matter to them ?
Put it together with a major catastrophe, such as a massive collapse of the dollar and widespread disruption of people's everyday economic lives; then people will be more predisposed to ACT on what they know.

But they would still be too afraid.
We need some kind of measurable public victory - to demonstrate that meaningful resistance is even possible ....

Until then, any limited hangout will do, no matter how transparently weak and absurd it sounds.

[theSaiGirl]

4. Catching up on some older history ...

By the way, your reference to the SLA and Patty Hearst kidnapping might need some additional updating.

The SLA was organized, state-sponsored provocation; beginning with the Black Cultural Studies Association organized by "former" CIA agent Colston Westbrook (Vietnam Phonenix Program), using snitches and mental patients like Donald DeFreeze ("Cinque"), along with some really stupid dupes.

The SLA and Hearst kidnapping were always CIA operations.
Right out of the "Gladio" and "strategy of tension" playbooks they were using in Europe at the same exact time.

http://rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/2005/06/working-class-hero-is-something-to-be.html
http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:Gauh8EgyhiYJ:webpages.charter.net/geminiwalker/HellSLA.html+SLA+Hearst+%22Colston+Westbrook%22&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1&lr=lang_en&ie=UTF-8
http://www.google.com/search?as_q=SLA+Hearst&num=10&hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&c2coff=1&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=Colston+Westbrook&as_oq=&as_eq=&lr=lang_en&as_ft=i&as_filetype=&as_qdr=all&as_occt=any&as_dt=i&as_sitesearch=&as_rights=&safe=off

[petgoat]

7. I always thought that firey shootout was suspicious. There were

suggestions of tunnels underneath that might aid a "SLA II".

I am also troubled by lethal injection as a means of execution. How do we
know that Tim McVeigh is really dead?

[spooked911]

15. Good analysis. This is why I usually feel that the truth about 9/11

will NEVER come out. It would destroy American as we know it.

[theobscure]

5. I don't think it can be overlooked that any government complicity..

means all government complicity. If you are going to believe that Bush/Cheney or a neo-con faction therein were responsible for either allowing the attacks or making them happen, it is impossible to account for the cover-up and whitewash without widely extending the scope of implication. There is the bi-partisan Congress to a person who has been completely silent about so many after attack issues regarding 9/11 and endorsed the 9/11 Commission whitewash. There is complicity at the state and local levels. Rudy Guiliani orders the swift removal and destruction of the ground zero evidence. Elliot Spitzer takes no interest in the criminal misinformation/deceit about the ground zero air quality.

Once you get to this point, it gets even harder to wrap your brain around this thing. Is our entire government, not only corrupt, but evil? In light of this, I've had to creep ever so slightly back from my firm MIHOP stance to open the door to the possibility of incompetence. Perhaps, this is the result of the vast incompetence and criminal negligence of two administrations (one of each party) that exposes the inevitable apathy toward detail (dereliction of duty) that is a natural result of being drunk with unaccountable, absolute power for so long.

This scenario begs the question, however, of how far would they go to cover their tracks? So far we have two wars, not to mention the declaration of perpetual war against the nebulous enemy of terror, the Patriot Act and it's renewal, and a massive increase in our already colossal military spending with a decrease in all other spending across the board. Are Republicans and Democrats so fearful of losing their mutual stranglehold on power that they would launch into diversionary tactics with such far-reaching and debilitating consequences?

HamdenRice, in this thread, offers a perspective that I do not have (too young) to what is a growing consideration in my mind. The possibility that we (the public at large) are being "protected" from the truth in order to avert the kind of chaos that could ensue and perhaps culminate in a complete collapse of our economy, our political institutions, our social safety net, and our standing in the world. Is the avoidance of such terrible consequences for ourselves worth the illegitimate killing of hundreds of thousands, even perhaps millions, around the world and an erosion, perhaps even eventual forfeiture, of our democratic rights here at home?

Lastly, I cannot dismiss the possibility that there is a small ruling class who for whatever reason has decided to remove the mask on their world domination. There was a lecture given by 9/11 Scholar Dr. David Ray Griffin, in the last few weeks, where he was asked in the Q&A at the end, if what he has learned about 9/11 keeps him awake at night. He replied that there is one thought that often does. What if, "the government wants us to know they did it, and they want us to know, they know we know they did it." It's a sobering and chilling thought.

I guess my conclusion is that there is so much we don't know, it is impossible to draw any reasonable assumptions from what we do know. It seems that the enormous amount of information we don't know likely serves to skew what we do know out of context. For this reason, those of us who do want to know the truth should take care to not race ahead and attach ourselves to one theory or the other. It only furthers the dilution of the context we will need at some point to make reasonable judgments.

Finally, regardless of the consequences, I do believe it is essential that we find out the truth. Any crisis we avert now will only burden future generations all the more and all the longer. We will have to trust ourselves and each other to pick up the pieces of humanity and civilization.

[theSaiGirl]

6. Nothing singular or special about 9/11 ... just more of the same..

"I don't think it can be overlooked that any government complicity..
means all government complicity. If you are going to believe that Bush/Cheney or a neo-con faction therein were responsible for either allowing the attacks or making them happen, it is impossible to account for the cover-up and whitewash without widely extending the scope of implication. There is the bi-partisan Congress to a person who has been completely silent about so many after attack issues regarding 9/11 and endorsed the 9/11 Commission whitewash. There is complicity at the state and local levels. Rudy Guiliani orders the swift removal and destruction of the ground zero evidence. Elliot Spitzer takes no interest in the criminal misinformation/deceit about the ground zero air quality."
- Posted by theobscure

Why dodge the inevitable implications ?

False-flag terror is a continuous, long-running historic method of shoring up power and advancing otherwise-unacceptable policies of war and police-state repression.
Hence, Griffin's characterization of 9/11 as "our own American Reichstag Fire".

The classic case: Nero setting fire to Rome, to expedite his architectural and urban re-development vision, then blaming it on the most convenient scapegoat (those subversive "atheistic" Christians - as Tacitus called them).

We have lived through so many "false-flags" - that 9/11 seems but one more link in a continuous chain of escalating "terror" and political blackmail...
stretching back through the decades ... to the Gulf of Tonkin ..
to the explosion aboard the Battleship Maine ... and back even further.

There is nothing singular or unique about 9/11.
Anymore than the London bombing of 7/7, the Madrid train bombings (where the Spanish public rejected outright the various morphing "offical stories" - first ETA did it, then Al Qaeda, then.. ?),
the Bali bombing, the Amman hotel bombings ...

9/11 fits neatly into a coherent and systematic chain of false-flag "events", serving to secure and consolidate a global police state ..
a world made "safe for democracy" - ie.. safe for corporate globalization and domination....
presenting .. the New World Order.

[theobscure]

8. I don't know that I am dodging the implications.....

I did allude to the consequences we will face if we don't confront the truth, whatever it may be. My post was already long enough; so I didn't want to delve into those details.

However, I don't see that the acknowledgment of a history of false flag terror automatically implies any inherent linkage other than the corrupting influence of power. I, of course, don't discount the New World Order scenario; but I can't say that I see a clear evidential path to follow through history to lead us to this unequivocal conclusion.

I've seen the theories. Zionists. International Bankers. Demonic Cabal. A Hidden World Monarchy. A Mysterious Illuminati. Who do you believe are the clear culprits? Corporations can only be the front. What and who exactly are behind them?

I'm not discounting your New World Order theory at all or even any of the potential culprits I mentioned. I just don't see clear evidence that points straight to the top. We have to start at the bottom with what is clearly evident and work our way up.

I also agree with one of your follow up posts about the possibility, even likelihood, that most Americans are aware on some level already about the fallacy of 9/11. There are various possibilities why this knowledge has not lead to action. Some of these include our capacity for denial of reality due to our seriously flawed belief structures constructed on deeply ingrained religious faith, a related inability to use critical thinking toward a solution or response, a preoccupation and vast overvaluing of material possession and living comforts, and a fear of death.

[petgoat]

10. Why don't we act?

Another reason is that the lack of irrefutable proof precludes even examining the
issues for many people.

What and who exactly are behind them?

A reasonable suspect would be those who had the motive, means, and opportunity.

Bush's 55% approvals went to 90% after 9/11.

The 9/11 story crowded out the news that the NORC report showed that Gore actually got more
votes in Florida and that the Pentagon could not account for $2.3 trillion in expenditures.

PNAC in its "Rebuilding America's Defenses" paper wished for a "New Pearl Harbor" and 9/11
was it.

Lockheed-Martin stock was at 19 in 2000; it's at 74 today.

http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/c/my/l/lmt

[theobscure]

12. I understand the easy implication to be drawn in regard to Bush and..

company. What I don't understand is how and why everyone can conveniently exclude or ignore Congress and state and local officials at least in terms of the cover-up and whitewash. While I agree that the 9/11 truth scholars are not calling outright for Bush's impeachment; they are clearly fingering Bush and his administration. I wouldn't have a problem with this if they were also making the equally easy connections beyond the Bush administration.

How is it that, EVERYONE, in Congress or in the State and Local Governments directly impacted on 9/11 has not only completely acquiesced to the official, and obviously preposterous, version of the attacks; but has also been totally silent regarding numerous aftermath issues (evidence destruction, air quality misinfo, etc), the lack of thoroughness, or even existence, of ancillary investigations (put options, alive "hijackers", phony OSB confession), and the lack of public disclosure(Pentagon attack tapes, OSB complicity 'white paper', war games)?

[mirandapriestly]

13. whoa, I didn't know that about Lockheed martin, not surprising though

with Clinton, it was tech stocks, with Bush defense...

[petgoat]

9. We should take care not to jump to conclusions.

This is why most thoughtful 9/11 scholars, while they may propose theories,
limit themselves to calling for a new investigation, and do not claim to
know the truth.

I hope you will be able to make it to the 9/11 conference in Chicago June 2-4.

http://www.911truth.org/ChicagoConference.htm

[petgoat]

11. To return to the topic

I have a limited hangout scenario.

Suppose al Qaeda operatives rented office space in the WTC. Many WTC tenants used their ]
offices for warehouse space. Thus our operatives could have smuggled explosives into the
building using the freight elevators. They could have planted the explosives in the elevator
shafts and above the false ceilings of vacant floors after midnight. The official investigations
could be covering up the fact of these bombs in order to spare Marvin Bush's security company
embarrassment.

Building 7 could have had lousy security. It could be that the security for the SEC and CIA offices
there simply satisfied themselves with securing their offices and did not concern themselves with
overall building security.

[spooked911]

14. That's good, Petgoat. Plausible and easy to rig up.

My limited hangout scenario is that the towers were pre-rigged with explosives after '93 in case of another terror attack-- so that when another attack occurred such as 9/11 happened, they could bring severely damaged buildings down more or less in their own footprint without taking out Wall Street and thousands of other people.

The idea is they HAD to do this to save more lives than were lost. But they had no foreknowledge of the airplane attacks or hijackings.

That would be a big but possible limited hangout.