I got this link sent to me via an email and I know how you can beleive EVERYTHING you get sent in an email and on the Internet…
Anyway, check it out… Something smells fishy…
http://www.freedomunderground.org/memoryhole/pentagon244.swf
That Flash animation is pretty old. Its been on this site a few times. There are definitly some major inconsistencies with the stories and facts. Here’s one for you…
In the time of crisis peoples first reaction is usually the correct one. Well thats what I’ve heard and what my experiences are. When I was watching things unfold the news cut to a reporter in Washington she said “A truck drove up to the Pentagons wall and exploded as it hit it.” The anchors questioned her and said “A truck?” She replied with “Yes, a truck!”
how dare you? we all know it was a plane, right? the government doesn’t lie, right? come on, it’s just a conspiracy theory, so what if the evidence doesn’t add up, we know it was those bad terrorists, that’t why our military is in Iraq fighting for our freedom…let’s rally behind our president, ra ra ra!..the tin foil hat is too tight…
Tubesteak Boogie
Oh and Jackzepplin I’ll take three of “Kutchers” those things are sweet.
[quote]elevationgain wrote:
Tubesteak Boogie
Oh and Jackzepplin I’ll take three of “Kutchers” those things are sweet.[/quote]
Double Tubesteak Boogie.
And I’ll take a Chapplin.
I think the Chaplin is more suited for the “Pimp” in me.
http://images.t-nation.com/forum_images/./1/.1128442579342.jonlocke.jpg
A more stylish model: http://www.stopabductions.com/
The thought helmet looks good on you Pookie!
So this is interesting. What’s more ridiculous?
The possibility of a coverup of some sort, whatever it may be?
Or the fevor of rejecting any possibility of such an event ever?
[quote]Gregus wrote:
So this is interesting. What’s more ridiculous?
The possibility of a coverup of some sort, whatever it may be?
Or the fevor of rejecting any possibility of such an event ever?
[/quote]
Good point.
On a side note, I still want to know who was holding the camera when we SUPPOSEDLY landed on the moon.
(I can’t believe how many people fell for that one)
Kidding asside, I wouldn’t put it past our govt. to cover anything up.
[quote]SWR-1222D wrote:
Gregus wrote:
So this is interesting. What’s more ridiculous?
The possibility of a coverup of some sort, whatever it may be?
Or the fevor of rejecting any possibility of such an event ever?
Good point.
On a side note, I still want to know who was holding the camera when we SUPPOSEDLY landed on the moon.
(I can’t believe how many people fell for that one)
Kidding asside, I wouldn’t put it past our govt. to cover anything up.[/quote]
Well i think it could be more of trying to save at least a little face in front of the world…Maybe.
Oh Shit, You know, it just hit me about who might have been holding that camera, shit this is gonna screw with me now, I mean Armstrong could not have layed the first steps on the moon if the cameraman had to get out to film him gettgin out, right, right? thanks bro, thanks.
More conspiracy theories. I honestly can’t believe the nut jobs who come to this site and spread this crap.
Okay (here we go again), why did the government fly a small plane or missle into it’s own Pentagon?
[quote]ZEB wrote:
More conspiracy theories. I honestly can’t believe the nut jobs who come to this site and spread this crap.
Okay (here we go again), why did the government fly a small plane or missle into it’s own Pentagon? [/quote]
The point isnt that the government did it, its the point that they are covering up what hit the pentagon.
Imagine if you had to explain to the world that a terrorist stole one of our Naval fighter planes and used it against us. How stupid as shit would we look?
We were taught at school that the the first pictures of man on the moon was in fact Aldrin and that we have no images of Armstrong on the moon because he was the “camera man”.
Amazing that the US goverment coverup reaches as far as schools in Africa.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
More conspiracy theories. I honestly can’t believe the nut jobs who come to this site and spread this crap.
Okay (here we go again), why did the government fly a small plane or missle into it’s own Pentagon? [/quote]
The same reason they blew up the Maine in Havana harbor, as a pretext to go to war with Spain…
The same reaon they allowed Pearl Harbor to be bombed, to drag us into WW2…
Just read the now de-classified document by the Joint Chiefs of Staff “Northwoods document” it spells it very clearly there…
It’s not a conspiracy theory, see it for yourself:
By David Ruppe
N E W Y O R K, May 1, 2001 - In the early 1960s, America’s top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba.
Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban ?migr?s, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.
The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba’s then new leader, communist Fidel Castro.
America’s top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties, writing: “We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba,” and, “casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation.”
Details of the plans are described in Body of Secrets (Doubleday), a new book by investigative reporter James Bamford about the history of America’s largest spy agency, the National Security Agency. However, the plans were not connected to the agency, he notes.
The plans had the written approval of all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and were presented to President Kennedy’s defense secretary, Robert McNamara, in March 1962. But they apparently were rejected by the civilian leadership and have gone undisclosed for nearly 40 years.
“These were Joint Chiefs of Staff documents. The reason these were held secret for so long is the Joint Chiefs never wanted to give these up because they were so embarrassing,” Bamford told ABCNEWS.com.
“The whole point of a democracy is to have leaders responding to the public will, and here this is the complete reverse, the military trying to trick the American people into a war that they want but that nobody else wants.”
Gunning for War
The documents show “the Joint Chiefs of Staff drew up and approved plans for what may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government,” writes Bamford.
The Joint Chiefs even proposed using the potential death of astronaut John Glenn during the first attempt to put an American into orbit as a false pretext for war with Cuba, the documents show.
Should the rocket explode and kill Glenn, they wrote, “the objective is to provide irrevocable proof ? that the fault lies with the Communists et all Cuba [sic].”
The plans were motivated by an intense desire among senior military leaders to depose Castro, who seized power in 1959 to become the first communist leader in the Western Hemisphere ? only 90 miles from U.S. shores.
The earlier CIA-backed Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba by Cuban exiles had been a disastrous failure, in which the military was not allowed to provide firepower.The military leaders now wanted a shot at it.
“The whole thing was so bizarre,” says Bamford, noting public and international support would be needed for an invasion, but apparently neither the American public, nor the Cuban public, wanted to see U.S. troops deployed to drive out Castro.
Reflecting this, the U.S. plan called for establishing prolonged military ? not democratic ? control over the island nation after the invasion.
“That’s what we’re supposed to be freeing them from,” Bamford says. “The only way we would have succeeded is by doing exactly what the Russians were doing all over the world, by imposing a government by tyranny, basically what we were accusing Castro himself of doing.”
‘Over the Edge’
The Joint Chiefs at the time were headed by Eisenhower appointee Army Gen. Lyman L. Lemnitzer, who, with the signed plans in hand made a pitch to McNamara on March 13, 1962, recommending Operation Northwoods be run by the military.
Whether the Joint Chiefs’ plans were rejected by McNamara in the meeting is not clear. But three days later, President Kennedy told Lemnitzer directly there was virtually no possibility of ever using overt force to take Cuba, Bamford reports. Within months, Lemnitzer would be denied another term as chairman and transferred to another job.
The secret plans came at a time when there was distrust in the military leadership about their civilian leadership, with leaders in the Kennedy administration viewed as too liberal, insufficiently experienced and soft on communism. At the same time, however, there real were concerns in American society about their military overstepping its bounds.
There were reports U.S. military leaders had encouraged their subordinates to vote conservative during the election.
And at least two popular books were published focusing on a right-wing military leadership pushing the limits against government policy of the day. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee published its own report on right-wing extremism in the military, warning a “considerable danger” in the “education and propaganda activities of military personnel” had been uncovered. The committee even called for an examination of any ties between Lemnitzer and right-wing groups. But Congress didn’t get wind of Northwoods, says Bamford.
“Although no one in Congress could have known at the time,” he writes, “Lemnitzer and the Joint Chiefs had quietly slipped over the edge.”
Even after Lemnitzer was gone, he writes, the Joint Chiefs continued to plan “pretext” operations at least through 1963.
One idea was to create a war between Cuba and another Latin American country so that the United States could intervene. Another was to pay someone in the Castro government to attack U.S. forces at the Guantanamo naval base ? an act, which Bamford notes, would have amounted to treason. And another was to fly low level U-2 flights over Cuba, with the intention of having one shot down as a pretext for a war.
“There really was a worry at the time about the military going off crazy and they did, but they never succeeded, but it wasn’t for lack of trying,” he says.
After 40 Years
Ironically, the documents came to light, says Bamford, in part because of the 1992 Oliver Stone film JFK, which examined the possibility of a conspiracy behind the assassination of President Kennedy.
As public interest in the assassination swelled after JFK’s release, Congress passed a law designed to increase the public’s access to government records related to the assassination.
The author says a friend on the board tipped him off to the documents.
Afraid of a congressional investigation, Lemnitzer had ordered all Joint Chiefs documents related to the Bay of Pigs destroyed, says Bamford. But somehow, these remained.
“The scary thing is none of this stuff comes out until 40 years after,” says Bamford.
Copyright ? 2005 ABC News Internet Ventures
Read 15 pages of declassified Joint Chiefs of Staff
documents on Operation Northwoods as posted on the
National Security Archive of George Washington University:
Key quotes from declassified Operation Northwoods document
The Operation Northwoods documents were approved by the Joint Chiefs of Staff?the top generals of each branch of the US armed forces?and submitted to the Secretary of Defense McNamara, though never acted upon. The documents only came to light because of a Freedom of Information Act request in the late 1990s. Page numbers are listed to assist in finding the quotes on the original documents. Could similar tactics to those listed below have been used in regards to 9/11?
Page 1 of 15-page GWU file (Memorandum)
(View original file on .pdf link above. PDF files require the free Adobe Acrobat Reader)
13 March 1962
MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
Subject: Justification for US Military Intervention in Cuba
The Joint Chiefs of Staff have considered the attached Memorandum for the Chief of Operations, Cuba Project, which responds to a request of that office for brief but precise description of pretexts which could provide justification for US military intervention in Cuba.
It is assumed that a single agency will be given the primary responsibility for developing military and para-military aspects of the basic plan. It is recommended that this responsibility for both overt and covert military operations be assigned the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Page 5 of 15-page GWU file (page 2 of actual Joint Chiefs report)
The suggested courses of action?.are based on the premise that US military intervention will result from a period of heightened US-Cuban tensions which place the United States in the position of suffering justifiable grievances. World opinion, and the United Nations forum should be favorably affected by developing the international image of the Cuban government as rash and irresponsible, and as an alarming and unpredictable threat to the peace of the Western Hemisphere.
Page 8 of 15-page GWU file (page 5 of actual Joint Chiefs report)
This plan?.should be developed to focus all efforts on a specific ultimate objective which would provide adequate justification for US military intervention. Such a plan would enable a logical build-up of incidents to be combined with other seemingly unrelated events to camouflage the ultimate objective.
Page 10-11 of 15-page GWU file (page 7-8 of actual Joint Chiefs report)
A series of well coordinated incidents will be planned to take place in and around Guantanamo to give genuine appearance of being done by hostile Cuban forces.
A. Incidents to establish a credible attack:
(1) Start rumors (many). Use clandestine radio
(2) Land friendly Cubans in uniform ?over-the-fence? to stage attack on base.
(3) Capture Cuban (friendly) saboteurs inside the base.
(4) Start riots near the base main gate (friendly Cubans).
(5) Blow up ammunition inside the base: start fires.
(6) Burn aircraft on air base (sabotage).
(7) Lob mortar shells from outside of base into base.
(8) Capture assault teams approaching from the sea or vicinity of Guantanamo City.
(9) Capture militia group which storms base.
(10) Sabotage ship in harbor; large fires ? naphthalene.
(11) Sink ship near harbor entrance. Conduct funerals for mock-victims.
A ?Remember the Maine? incident could be arranged: We could blow up a US ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba. Casualty lists in US newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation.
We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington.
Page 12 of 15-page GWU file (page 9 of actual Joint Chiefs report)
Use of MIG type aircraft by US pilots could provide additional provocation. Harassment of civil air, attacks on surface shipping and destruction of US military drone aircraft by MIG type planes would be useful as complementary actions. Reasonable copies of the MIG could be produced from US resources in about three months.
Page 13 of 15-page GWU file (page 10 of actual Joint Chiefs report)
Hijacking attempts against civil air and surface craft should appear to continue as harassing measures condoned by the government of Cuba.
It is possible to create an incident which will demonstrate convincingly that a Cuban aircraft has attacked and shot down a chartered civil airliner enroute from the United States. The destination would be chosen only to cause the flight plan to cross Cuba. The passengers could be a group of college students off on a holiday.
An aircraft at Eglin AFB would be painted and numbered as an exact duplicate for a civil registered aircraft belonging to a CIA proprietary organization in the Miami area. At the designated time the duplicate would be substituted for the actual civil aircraft and would be loaded with selected passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases. The actual aircraft would be converted to a drone.
The drone aircraft and the actual aircraft will be scheduled to allow a rendezvous south of Florida. From the rendezvous point the passenger-carrying aircraft will descend to minimum altitude and go directly into an auxiliary field at Eglin AFB where arrangements will have been made to evacuate the passengers and return the aircraft to its original status. The drone aircraft meanwhile will continue to fly the filed flight plan. When over Cuba the drone will be transmitting on the international distress frequency a ?MAY DAY? message stating he is under attack by Cuban MIG aircraft. The transmission will be interrupted by destruction of the aircraft which will be triggered by radio signal.
Resistance is futile.