1. He shouldn’t have included planes in his novel, but it is still helpful overall:
“New 9/11 Truth-Related Novel: No Place to Run
Sawyer said, “I absolutely, passionately believe that 9/11 was enabled by forces and interests high up in America-both government and commercial-people who knew it was in work could have prevented it, but decided instead that it offered an excuse for another war. Something upon which our entire economy and incredible prosperity has depended since World War II. Something that, as 2001 neared its end, it was time for once again.
…
He added that with the “highly questionable” collapse of the Twin Towers and the cover-up of Flight 93 having been shot down, there are far too many such “Whoa – just a minute now” red flags.
Sawyer said he finds it difficult to imagine that anyone, on carefully reviewing as he did the events of that day, what led to them and what has followed, could arrive at any other conclusion.
Making that point was his main reason for writing the novel, he said. “It struck me that I might try via popular fiction to reach even a few people who wouldn’t normally view things that way. All of us view the world and process what we see, hear and read through our own filters. But I continue to be boggled by how readily-eagerly, really-the public buys into the many lies we’re handed.”
…
His take on the reason for that refusal: “America is the World Capital of Denial. We seem congenitally unable or unwilling to question our own or our government’s true motives.”
“Incidentally,” Sawyer added, “The 9/11 Commission Report, which appeared at about the time I was finishing “No Place to Run,” failed to refute any of what my novel posits about the events of that day.”
…
“I was witnessing the single most dramatic statement of rage in the history of the world and the question it raised was: What does it take to make people that angry? …”
Whose rage? Who’s angry? The “terrorists”?
On 9/11, I witnessed a most dramatic act of cruel, calculated criminality. That’s not rage, that’s cold-blooded, sociopathic cynicism.
The attacks on 9/11 were not “allowed” to happen, they were meticulously planned and expertly executed by people who had the power and authority to shut down US air defences, control the media coverage, dispose of the evidence, forestall an investigation, bribe, intimidate or coerce officials … and we’re not talking al qaeda …”
http://www.911blogger.com/node/21635
2. What a swell guy:
“Bolton suggests nuclear attack on Iran
Of course, it is nothing new for Bolton and his neoconservative allies to threaten an Israeli strike against Iran. But Bolton’s use of the “n-word” is, I believe, new for him, and marks a significant rhetorical escalation from the hawks. An Israeli strike, nuclear or otherwise, without U.S. permission remains unlikely. But as it often the case, I suspect that Bolton’s intention is less to give an accurate description of reality than it is to stake out positions extreme enough to shift the boundaries of debate as a whole to the right.”
http://www.ips.org/blog/jimlobe/?p=300
3. “Secret Italian Bribes to Taliban — Tip of the Iceberg?
But the evidence is out there if you look hard enough — it’s just no one wants to talk about the possibility that we are paying off the enemy in order to maintain the occupation. It’s madness.
…
Private contractors paying bribes trying to get their convoys through insurgent-riddled communication lines to military installations are bad enough – but governments paying the Taliban directly? And not doing it to eventually end the war, but to merely get through the next rotation? Catastrophically incorrect is a good way of putting it.
http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2009/10/15/secret-italian-bribes-to-taliban-tip-of-the-iceberg/
4. So, not only was Lenin funded by the Rothschilds, etc., and Hitler by Prescott Bush, father of George H.W., but England funded Mussoliini. What a surprise:
“Recruited by MI5: the name’s Mussolini. Benito Mussolini
Archived documents have revealed that Mussolini got his start in politics in 1917 with the help of a £100 weekly wage from MI5.
For the British intelligence agency, it must have seemed like a good investment. Mussolini, then a 34-year-old journalist, was not just willing to ensure Italy continued to fight alongside the allies in the first world war by publishing propaganda in his paper. He was also willing to send in the boys to “persuade” peace protesters to stay at home.
Mussolini’s payments were authorised by Sir Samuel Hoare, an MP and MI5′s man in Rome, who ran a staff of 100 British intelligence officers in Italy at the time.
…
As well as keeping the presses rolling at Il Popolo d’Italia, the newspaper he edited, Mussolini also told Hoare he would send Italian army veterans to beat up peace protesters in Milan, a dry run for his fascist blackshirt units.
…
His colonial ambitions in Africa brought him into contact with his old paymaster again in 1935. Now the British foreign secretary, Hoare signed the Hoare-Laval pact, which gave Italy control over Abyssinia.
…
Martland said: “Mussolini ended his life hung upside down in Milan, but history has not been kind to Hoare either, condemned as an appeaser of fascism alongside Neville Chamberlain.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/oct/13/benito-mussolini-recruited-mi5-italy
5. The basis of neocon foreign policy – encircle Russia and China with friendly dictators in each neighboring country, install permanent US military bases in each, and sow dissension among them all:
“Brzezinski’s “Grand Chessboard”
In his 1997 book, The Grand Chessboard, Brzezinski outlined a strategy for America in the world. He wrote, “For America, the chief geopolitical prize is Eurasia. For half a millennium, world affairs were dominated by Eurasian powers and peoples who fought with one another for regional domination and reached out for global power.” Further, “how America ‘manages’ Eurasia is critical. Eurasia is the globe’s largest continent and is geopolitically axial. A power that dominates Eurasia would control two of the world’s three most advanced and economically productive regions. A mere glance at the map also suggests that control over Eurasia would almost automatically entail African subordination.”
…
Brzezinski removed all subtlety from his imperial leanings, and wrote, “To put it in a terminology that harkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together.”[32]
Brzezinski referred to the Central Asian republics as the “Eurasian Balkans,” writing that, “Moreover, they [the Central Asian Republics] are of importance from the standpoint of security and historical ambitions to at least three of their most immediate and more powerful neighbors, namely Russia, Turkey and Iran, with China also signaling an increasing political interest in the region. But the Eurasian Balkans are infinitely more important as a potential economic prize: an enormous concentration of natural gas and oil reserves is located in the region, in addition to important minerals, including gold.”[33] He further wrote that, “It follows that America’s primary interest is to help ensure that no single power comes to control this geopolitical space and that the global community has unhindered financial and economic access to it.”[34] This is a clear example of America’s role as an engine of empire; with foreign imperial policy designed to maintain US strategic positions, but primarily and “infinitely more important,” is to secure an “economic prize” for “the global community.” In other words, the United States is an imperial hegemon working for international financial interests.
Brzezinski also warned that, “the United States may have to determine how to cope with regional coalitions that seek to push America out of Eurasia, thereby threatening America’s status as a global power,”[35] and he, “puts a premium on maneuver and manipulation in order to prevent the emergence of a hostile coalition that could eventually seek to challenge America’s primacy.” Thus, “The most immediate task is to make certain that no state or combination of states gains the capacity to expel the United States from Eurasia or even to diminish significantly its decisive arbitration role.”[36]“
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=15686
6. This might actually be the most despicable domestic political event of the year. Somehow I doubt they will next investigate Jewish activity:
“GOP House members call for investigation of Muslim political activity
…
“Muslim interns in Congressional offices” – frightening! Look at this repulsive innuendo, from Rep. Franks:
While the Republicans said they did not know of specific legislation that CAIR had affected, Franks, a Judiciary Committee member, said he wouldn’t be surprised if it was trying to amend the Patriot Act.
…
Patriot Act reforms have long been advocated by what The New York Times called “an unlikely coalition of liberal civil-rights advocates, conservative libertarians, gun-rights supporters and medical privacy advocates.” Several Senators — including the Democrats’ second-highest ranking member, Dick Durbin — just voted (unsuccessfully) to impose new limits on that law. But when “America’s largest Islamic civil liberties group” takes the same position, these crazed, blatantly bigoted House Republicans spit out McCarthyite smears trying to imply that they’re working from within to help Terrorists attack America. It’s nothing less than an attempt to criminalize organized political activity by and on behalf of American Muslims.
Just to underscore how extremist the House GOP caucus is, this hysteria is all based on a new book entitled ”Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That’s Conspiring to Islamize America.” That’s the source which these House members are using. In fact, one of the GOP House members, Rep. Sue Myrick of North Carolina, wrote the foreword to the book.”
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/
7. “Fighting the Taliban What, Exactly, is Being Fought in Afghanistan?
Washington insiders do not mention that the Taliban’s “harsh form of oppression on women and others,” which everyone from Madeleine Albright to Hillary Clinton have argued provides cause for war, is not a concern when relations with ‘Wahhabi’ Saudi Arabia are pursued.
…
‘Exactly what…is being fought’ today, Roy astutely asks. The short answer is that today, as has been the case since 1979, neither a specific ‘militant’ nor ‘ideology’ is ‘being fought.’ Rather, the target of operations, for which more troops are now being sought, is anyone who challenges the interests of an oil-drenched ‘New World Order.’“
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article23728.htm
8. “Not only are Muslims coming — but they want to take over America! At least that’s what four Republican Members of Congress alleged today.
Representatives John Shadegg (Ariz.), Paul Broun (Ga.), Trent Franks (Ariz.) and Sue Myrick (N.C.) are alarmed because they found Muslims trying to lobby Congress. Can you believe that? Muslims-Americans actually want to have input into the American political system! Thank God (a/k/a Allah) that we have these four Congressional watch dogs on the job being paid with our tax dollars to warn of the Muslims dastardly plan to influence legislation.
…
Are Muslims really trying to take over America? Most estimates indicate that there are 3-4 million Muslims in the United States. In order for Muslims to take over, simple math says they have to be at least 50 percent of the 300 million Americans. As of now, Muslims are still about 147 million people short.”
