Prophecy

We are seeing a significant erosion of our liberties in America, as George W. Bush, using the threat of terrorism as an excuse, is systematically broadening surveillance, limiting travel, detaining citizens without charge or access to legal counsel, and eliminating privacy as a right.

Where did Bush's supporters come from?

Postby kathaksung » Sat May 06, 2006 7:35 pm

Quote, "Men, whites, Catholics boost Bush in latest AP poll
12/9/2005

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Bush's improved standing with whites, men, Catholics and other core supporters has been a key factor in pushing his job approval rating up to 42%. That's the highest level since summer."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington ... poll_x.htm

Does the population of whites, men increased by 5%? Or 5% of people turn to be Catholics? If these are core supporters, how can they be counted flip flop 5%? When "information operation" office manipulates the poll number, they pick up a reason by hand. No matter how absurd it is.

Poll is a tool used to control public's mind. It represents the intention of the Inside group not people's.

Pope John paul had had a strong message for President George W. Bush: God is not on your side if you invade Iraq." This was said two years ago. So how can catholics a core supporter to Bush?

Quote, "U.S. Church Alliance Denounces Iraq War

By BRIAN MURPHY, AP Religion Writer Sat Feb 18,
PORTO ALEGRE, Brazil - A coalition of American churches sharply denounced the U.S.-led war in Iraq on Saturday, accusing Washington of "raining down terror" and apologizing to other nations for "the violence, degradation and poverty our nation has sown."

The statement, issued at the largest gathering of Christian churches in nearly a decade, also warned the United States was pushing the world toward environmental catastrophe with a "culture of consumption" and its refusal to back international accords seeking to battle global warming.

The two-page statement from the WCC group came at the midpoint of a 10-day meeting of more than 4,000 religious leaders, scholars and activists discussing trends and goals for major Christian denominations for the coming decades.

The churches said they had "grown heavy with guilt" for not doing enough to speak out against the Iraq war and other issues.

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/viewtopic. ... 99&forum=7

Where do these "Bush supporters" come from? Neither from Catholics nor from Christians. What else left? Only come from the magician's hat of media's poll. The actual figure may be well below 20%.
kathaksung
Statesman
Statesman
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 2:46 am
Location: San Jose, Ca.

Postby kathaksung » Wed May 17, 2006 7:36 pm

Here is a poll done by AOL on 3/10. It may prove what I said in last message was true. Bush's true approve rate is well below 20%.

How do you rate President Bush on domestic affairs?
Poor 87%
Good 7%
Fair 6%
Total Votes: 46,178

How do rate him on overall foreign policy and terrorism?
Poor 84%
Good 9%
Fair 7%
Total Votes: 46,399 (3/10/06)

Though such kind of poll is always referred as un-scientific, I trust it much more than those of media's. Although still it can be manipulated (If Feds penetrated AOL) but consider Bush is a puppet of D.O.J., Feds has no reason to discredit him at this time.
kathaksung
Statesman
Statesman
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 2:46 am
Location: San Jose, Ca.

Postby kathaksung » Sat May 27, 2006 5:59 pm

Voting machines removed in Grafton
By CAROL ROBIDOUX
Union Leader Staff
Thursday, Mar. 16, 2006

Grafton – No matter how you do the math, 193 "yeas" plus 198 "nays" don't add up to 369 votes.
That faulty equation — results of a warrant article vote from Tuesday's election ballot — was the first clue for Grafton town officials that something was wrong.

As a result, two voting machines used to collect ballots in the annual town and school district meetings are now in the custody of the Attorney General's Office, removed from the town yesterday, said Grafton Selectman Jennie Joyce.

http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx ... a60b903754

What if the add up was correct but some "Nay"s were transfered to "yeas"?

Nobody could know the mistake because voter only knew the vote of his own.

That's how Bush could be selected President.
kathaksung
Statesman
Statesman
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 2:46 am
Location: San Jose, Ca.

Save the reputation of poll (4/23/06)

Postby kathaksung » Wed Jun 07, 2006 5:53 pm

Save the reputation of poll (4/23/06)

Bush's approve rate may have never been higher than 30% after he activated the Iraq war. So even 33% is an exageration. Then why do we see a recent down fall of Bush's rate?

It is to save your belief on media. More and more people start to realize media and poll are mind control tools of government. They realize Bush's selection was the result of a rigged voting system and the media propaganda and poll cheating.

So they let Bush's rate down. A fact they hard to cover up anymore. It doesn't hurt. Bush has been in his second term. He couldn't go for a third term. Bush himself said he didn't care about it. A bird is in hand. Who cares the other birds in the woods.

But that will save your confidence on media and poll. See, we gave a fair judgement on that bad boy. Trust us next time when we gave new poll.

But keep in mind how a war criminal could be selected as a president twice and how the media has helped his selection. Don't be blinded by cover up propaganda. The recent down fall of Bush's rate is to save the reputation of poll so they can go on to cheat.

Beware of another "terror attack". Bush got his seat by "terror attack". To save his reputation, he may use it again.
kathaksung
Statesman
Statesman
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 2:46 am
Location: San Jose, Ca.

Postby kathaksung » Sat Jun 17, 2006 7:43 pm

A conflict poll

When NSA's phone data collecting was revealed, there were conflict polls. ABC said 63% people approve the spying. One day later, Newsweek said 57% people oppose it. A 20% difference at least. Which one do you believe?

Re: ABC

May 12, 2006 — Lending support to the administration's defense of its anti-terrorism intelligence efforts, 63 percent in this ABC News/Washington Post poll say the secret program, disclosed Thursday by USA Today, is justified, while far fewer, 35 percent, call it unjustified.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=1953464

Most Americans Oppose NSA Phone Data Program in Newsweek Poll

May 13 (Bloomberg) -- The Newsweek poll found that 57 percent of Americans think President George W. Bush's administration has gone too far in expanding presidential power. Thirty-eight percent of respondents said it hasn't gone too far.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...QxLRw&refer=us

Bloomberg reported 41% of American support NSA Surveillance. In two days, there were 22% difference to the 63% done by ABC. Is that too easy to manipulate a poll number?

Is America the home of coward and the land of covert totalitarian? Most people like themselves to be monitored?

The reality is when the government wants to justify their fascist policy, they throw out a poll number to justify it. Then they found the lie is too big to be believed, (ABC's) so they hurridly push out another one to make it more acceptable. (Newsweek's)

But I think the real number of people who have the mind of slaves (include those who monitor others) may not be bigger than 20%.

Anyway, it reveals media and poll are only mind control tools of the government. How easy it is to be manipulated.
kathaksung
Statesman
Statesman
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 2:46 am
Location: San Jose, Ca.

Moussaoui hoax

Postby kathaksung » Tue Jun 27, 2006 6:16 pm

Moussaoui hoax

911 is a hoax. Many people have realized it was a government inside work. The trial of Moussaoui is only a show. To convince the others 911 attack was done by Al Qaida.

Moussaoui plays the same role as Padilla. Padilla is an informant and was arrested for "dirty bomb" case. He was used to prove that Saddam had planned to attack US.

Intelligence used to eliminate anyone who could reveal the truth. In 911 attack, all 19 hijackers died in crash. In London bombing, all four "suicide bombers" were blew to pieces. In Madrid bombing, the "bombers" all died in a police raid. Thus nobody knew the truth ever. But they also want people believe the attack was done by Al Qaida not others. So there are prepared witness: Padilla and Moussaoui. The men worked for intelligence.

Moussaoui was arrested one month earlier before 911 attack. It was said there was plan in his computer but FBI didn't search his computer. FBI said they were afraid to touch the wall of domestic criminal law. It's ridiculous. Moussaoui is a foreigner. He fits for FISA, even a nonprofessional knows. FBI is notorious for abusing their power, do you believe they won't search a detaineer's computer?

But Moussaoui was designated for being a witness of 911. That's why he was arrested, with obvious evidence to be a witness. But at the same time FBI said they didn't search the evidence. Because otherwise the 911 attack couldn't go true. And D.O.J. couldn't get the Patriout Act, and the Inside group couldn't have the war in Mid-east.

There was another big flaw there. One principle for the secret work, either for a spy, an intelligence job, or for a terrorist, is that if one of them was arrested, the plan would be cancelled immediately and the team would withdraw. Because it was assumed the plan has been revealed. How could the other hijakers behaved like nothing happened. They going on a normal life until 911, with one of them arrested for weeks. Or do they know FBI won't search their fellow's computer?

Another big joke was when the hijacker going for a top secret job, would they bring a plan with them? It could be used only for evidence. So much for Moussaoui's case.
kathaksung
Statesman
Statesman
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 2:46 am
Location: San Jose, Ca.

Postby kathaksung » Fri Jul 07, 2006 7:39 pm

Moussaoui hoax (2)

Another flaw of Moussaoui case is that he probably never had the experience to fly a plane, let alone a Boeing.

He was said to attending a flying school intending to learn to pilot a Boeing plane. Think with your brain, what kind of qualification for a pilot of Boeing? The students should have basic flying knowledgement. They should have experience to fly other low ranking air planes. (Maybe hundreds of hours)Even such people who past the Boeing training course, they would practise as assistant for hundreds hours before they can handle a real Boeing. Flying a Boeing just like to study in a college, you have to have the experience of Primary and high school.

Will the flight school take whomever who want to learn flying a Boeing? Do these school train Boeing pilot without any qualification? Do you think the pilots of airline were trained by such kind of flying school?

Of course, if you think in a normal way, then the Moussaoui case and 911 event became a hoax. That's why they focused on 911 victims. Let the jury hear Flight 93 recording, let former N.Y. Mayor Guiliani to testify, show you the tape of WTC collapsing ..... all purposed to flame an emotional hatred, none can prove Moussaoui a member of 911 perpetrators.

The case is so fragile, (they avoid to talk about it). They prosecute one who have no experience to fly a Boeing plane to hit the White House by a Boeing plane. That makes US court a big joke. When they want a war, they said there was WMD. When they want a scapegoat for 911, they gave you a psycho who had no experience to fly Boeing. Yet so many people believe it.

Is it a chaotic show?
kathaksung
Statesman
Statesman
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 2:46 am
Location: San Jose, Ca.

Moussaoui hoax (3)

Postby kathaksung » Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:23 pm

Moussaoui hoax (3)

The background why Moussaoui is put on court at this time. It's when Charlie Sheen had his opinion that 911 is likely an inside job and other experts in succession suggest that 911 was manipulated by this administration as another Pearl Harbor. Bush government is in a trough of untrustworthy. They need help. So they push out Moussaoui.

Moussaoui's "I am Al Qaida." became the big title of media. He admitted his mission was to fly the fifth plane to hit the White House. That's what government wants. How convenient they got the evidence to prove it's an Al Qaida's work not their's.

But question comes again. How could Moussaoui hijack a plane by himself? How could he control the passengers while flying a plane? Where is other team member? So now government must find some other puppets and create some stories to support this 5th plane's story.

What a circus. Still we saw government releasing the conversation between the WTC victim and 911 emergence dispatcher, or let out a new film of "flight 93". At this time, it was used as a tool of psychological influence. You can see how government control public's mind if you stand at a higher level and watch over these news.
kathaksung
Statesman
Statesman
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 2:46 am
Location: San Jose, Ca.

Moussaoui hoax (4)

Postby kathaksung » Fri Jul 28, 2006 5:18 pm

Moussaoui hoax (4)

FBI awards man who blocked MN investigation

Quote, " FBI performs a nasty little sequel to whistle-blower saga
Doug Grow Star Tribune Published Dec. 22, 2002

The Star Tribune's Greg Gordon reported last week that at a quiet little ceremony earlier this month, Marion (Spike) Bowman was one of nine people in the bureau to receive an award for "exceptional performance." The award carries with it a cash bonus of 20 to 35 percent of the recipient's salary and a framed certificate signed by the president.

What does this have to do with Rowley?
Bowman heads the FBI's National Security Law Unit. That's the unit that blocked Minneapolis agents from pursuing their suspicions about Moussaoui.

There were no FBI honors for the Minneapolis office. There was a big honor for the lead antagonist of the Minneapolis office."

http://www.startribune.com/stories/462/3547688.html

When the low ranking FBI agent warned his supervisors more than 70 times that Moussaoui was a terrorist and might hijack a plane, he got no reward for his good work.

But the high ranking officer got a reward after that. What achievement has he got that could overcome the big mistake (or more accurately, a criminal neglegence) that he had blocked the important discovery his staff has made?

That's why I say Moussaoui was a prepared witness by inside group. Low ranking FBI agent did their job to report it. The high ranking officials knew what was it. It was too early to declair Moussaoui was a potential hijacker. They must block it otherwise there would be no 911, and the war the inside group wanted couldn't go true. Those who blocked the revelation got a reward.
kathaksung
Statesman
Statesman
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 2:46 am
Location: San Jose, Ca.

Postby kathaksung » Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:21 pm

Sen Specter readies bill to help Bush expanding his fascist power to monitor people without court approval.

No check and balance for Bush if the bill past.

The secret wiretapping program is a violation to the Constitution, circumvents the law on secret-intelligence wiretaps and is clearly a unilateral power grab by the president.

Quote, "Stop the presidential power grab

Sen. Arlen Specter has crafted a bill that would rubber-stamp the program. Worse, it would essentially embed into federal law the notion that the president has the power under the Constitution to conduct electronic surveillance on anyone he wants, indefinitely and without judicial oversight, making a mockery of the right to privacy. The bill could come before the Senate Judiciary Committee as early as Thursday and must be defeated.

.... If the Specter bill becomes law, court orders will no longer be required for electronic surveillance of ordinary Americans. Because wiretaps would be secret, their targets would never find out they were monitored, even if they were deemed to be innocent. It would be up to the American people to trust the government's claims that it is only monitoring terrorists. In short, it would be an invitation to wholesale abuses of power and to the return of the politically motivated domestic spying that was commonplace int 1960s and 1970s. " (Mercury News 8/2/2006)
kathaksung
Statesman
Statesman
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 2:46 am
Location: San Jose, Ca.

Postby kathaksung » Tue Aug 22, 2006 6:48 pm

Government released a cockpit tape. It could be a fake from the "disinformation strategy office" of intelligence. As cheap as Bin Laden's tape and Nick Berg's beheading tape. To produce one like that is as easy as to produce a film "Flight 93".

Appeals to Fabricated Evidence

The most stunning example of government mendacity in the Moussaoui trial, Fetzer explains, came with the inflammatory recordings, allegedly the last moments of Flight 93, which went down in Pennsylvania. "Not only should they not have been admitted into evidence," he said, "but Allen Green has noted that much of the conversation is from the passenger cabin -- which would not have been picked up in by the cockpit voice recorder, even through an open door. Yet the cockpit door was supposed to be closed before it was finally broken open using a drink cart."

Another blunder was noted by a Muslim member of S9/11T. The last words of the "hijackers" on the tape are "Allah is great! (Allahu akbar!"). Muhammad Columbo says, "The last words of a Muslim cannot be these! They are used in the call to prayer, or in an attack at war. On the moment of death, a Muslim must confirm that "There is but one God, Allah, and that Mohammed is his prophet!" The government's own evidence proves either the tapes or the Muslims are fake.

Fetzer has also been struck by the use of phrases that appear to come from Hollywood scripts. "It's not enough that he talks about "making his day" as though he were a fan of Dirty Harry, but he also parodies "Born in the USA" with his rendition of "Burn in the USA" and has described his trial as a 'cyberlynching'. We are so used to movies that we may not notice this is supposed to be real life, where this trial appears to be following a script.

Scholars for 9/11 Truth
Prof. James Fetzer
218-726-7269

http://disc.server.com/discussion.cgi?d ... title=APFN
kathaksung
Statesman
Statesman
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 2:46 am
Location: San Jose, Ca.

Postby kathaksung » Thu Aug 31, 2006 3:01 pm

The actual events were created hoax. Cheney knew it before news reported it. All this was pre-planned.

Quote, "Flight 93: The New Media Campaign
Sat Apr 15, 2006 00:06
64.140.158.37
Flight 93: The New Media Campaign

by Russell Pickering
russellpickering@bresnan.net

Why has Flight 93 suddenly taken center stage? Plain and simple it is the last resort of the perpetrators to hide. As 9/11 Truth groups successfully move forward with the goal of awakening Americans to the facts of the four events that occurred that day, only one is in a remote, obscure field. Only one was unavailable for real inspection (even in photos) until the trial. Only one is embedded in a legend of heroism.

Is there any evidence that the story of heroism was a pre-planned cover story? Yes there is. In an interview with CNN's John King in the vice president's office on September 11, 2002 Cheney was reported to have made a very interesting statement.

"Word came that Flight 93 crashed in Pennsylvania. Aides frantically called the White House to find out whether a military jet had shot it down.

"'The vice president was a little bit ahead of us,' said Eric Edelman, Cheney's national security advisor. 'He said sort of softly and to nobody in particular, 'I think an act of heroism just took place on that plane.'" (1)

In the context of having just given shoot down orders they received word that Flight 93 had crashed. They had no idea why as evidenced by the fact they were trying to determine if a military jet had shot it down. But Cheney in an underground bunker with confusion raging everywhere and no knowledge beyond what his aides were telling him says, "I think an act of heroism just took place on that plane."? Wait a second…..what could he have possibly based that statement on?

Even his aide noticed Cheney was, "a little bit ahead of us". I would go so far as to say he was a lot ahead of everybody. There was absolutely no possible way that Cheney was aware of the alleged cell phone calls and most certainly he had not heard the cockpit voice recorder. Where did he get his idea from?

http://disc.server.com/discussion.cgi?d ... title=APFN
kathaksung
Statesman
Statesman
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 2:46 am
Location: San Jose, Ca.

Postby kathaksung » Thu Sep 07, 2006 6:45 pm

Hani Hanjour, a hijacker in 911 described by FBI as the pilot, was not able to control a single engine Cessna. Moussaoui was much worse, how could he be accused in a case for piloting a Boeing?

Quote, "Hani Hanjour:
9/11 Pilot Extraordinaire
From the ridiculous to the sublime...

At Freeway Airport in Bowie, Md., 20 miles west of Washington, flight instructor Sheri Baxter instantly recognized the name of alleged hijacker Hani Hanjour when the FBI released a list of 19 suspects in the four hijackings. Hanjour, the only suspect on Flight 77 the FBI listed as a pilot, had come to the airport one month earlier seeking to rent a small plane.

However, when Baxter and fellow instructor Ben Conner took the slender, soft-spoken Hanjour on three test runs during the second week of August, they found he had trouble controlling and landing the single-engine Cessna 172. Even though Hanjour showed a federal pilot's license and a log book cataloging 600 hours of flying experience, chief flight instructor Marcel Bernard declined to rent him a plane without more lessons.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/hanjour.html

Staff members characterized Mr. Hanjour as polite, meek and very quiet. But most of all, the former employee said, they considered him a very bad pilot. "I'm still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon," the former employee said. "He could not fly at all."

May 4, 2002, Saturday

A Trainee Noted for Incompetence

By JIM YARDLEY (NYT) 592 words
Late Edition - Final , Section A , Page 10 , Column 2

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.h ... 94DA404482
kathaksung
Statesman
Statesman
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 2:46 am
Location: San Jose, Ca.

Postby kathaksung » Tue Sep 19, 2006 7:42 pm

Stephen M. St. John
Precursors to Remote-Controlled Flights of 9/11?
Tue May 2, 2006 18:17

The 9/11 Commissioners ignored indications of remote control piloting of the jets of 9/11 brought forward by retired Army Colonel Donn de Grand Pre (among others), who had convened within days of 9/11 a meeting of military, commercial and civilian aviators and experts. Their conclusions, which De Grand Pre reported to the highest levels of the Pentagon, were that the jets of 9/11 could not possibly have been flown the way they were flown by Arab flight students and that the best explanation for these flights was that they were flown by remote control during the peak activities of multiple NORAD drills.

http://disc.server.com/discussion.cgi?d ... agemark=40
kathaksung
Statesman
Statesman
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 2:46 am
Location: San Jose, Ca.

Postby kathaksung » Fri Sep 29, 2006 6:15 pm

Zionist Commando Daniel Lewin Orchestrated The 9-11 Terrorist Attacks
His Troops Stole Arab Identites While Mossad Agents In Hollywood, Florida Assassinated Mohammed Atta And Framed Him For The Crime

3/7/2004 12:55:07 AM
Anonymous

Now about Mohamed Atta … the so-called "ring leader". There are a number of inconsistencies with that story as well. Like some of the 7 hijackers known to be still alive, Atta also had his passport stolen in 1999, (perhaps the same passport that miraculously survived the WTC explosion and collapse?), making him an easy mark for identity theft. Atta was known to all as a shy, timid and sheltered young man who was uncomfortable with women. The 5 foot 7 inch, 150 pound architecture student was such a "goody two shoes" that some of his university acquaintances in Germany refrained from drinking or cursing in front of him. How this gentle, non-political momma's boy from a good Egyptian family suddenly transformed himself into the vodka drinking, go-go girl groping terrorist animal described by the media, has to rank as the greatest personality change since another classic work of fiction, Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde.
Atta, or someone using Atta's identity, had enrolled in a Florida flight school in 2001 and then broke off training, making it a point to tell his instructor he was leaving for Boston, In an October 2001 interview with an ABC affiliate in Florida, flight school president Rudi Dekkers said that his course does not qualify pilots to fly jumbo jets. He also described Atta as "an asshole" Part of the reason for Dekker's dislike for Atta stems from a highly unusual incident that occurred at the beginning of the course. Here's the exchange between ABC producer Quentin McDermott and Dekkers:
MCDERMOTT: "Why do you say Atta was an asshole?"

DEKKERS: "Well, when Atta was here and I saw his face on several occasions in the building, then I know that they're regular students and then I try to talk to them, it's a kind of PR – where are you from? I tried to communicate with him. I found out from my people that he lived in Hamburg and he spoke German so one of the days that I saw him, I speak German myself, I'm a Dutch citizen, and I started in the morning telling him in German, "Good morning. How are you? How do you like the coffee? Are you happy here?", and he looked at me with cold eyes, didn't react at all and walked away. That was one of my first meetings I had."
That is easily similar to the way in which Zacharias Moussaoui (the so- called "20th hijacker") became "belligerent" when his Minnesota flight instructor tried to speak to him in French (his first language) at the beginning of that course. The Minnesota Star Tribune reported on December 21, 2001:
"Moussaoui first raised eyebrows when, during a simple introductory exchange, he said he was from France, but then didn't seem to understand when the instructor spoke French to him. Moussaoui then became belligerent and evasive about his background, Congressman Oberstar and other sources said. In addition, he seemed inept at basic flying procedures, while seeking expensive training on an advanced commercial jet simulator."
It truly is an amazing twist of fate that both Atta and Moussaoui had American flight instructors who spoke German and French respectively. Even the great Mossad could not have foreseen such a coincidence! The real Atta would have been able to respond to his instructor's German small talk and the real Moussaoui would have been able to respond to his instructor's French small talk. Atta just walked away and Moussaoui threw a fit! Neither responded because neither could. They were impostors, whose faces were probably disguised by a make up artist. Their mission was to frame the two innocent Arabs who were probably targeted by the Mossad at random.

The imposter was able to create a new Atta by using Atta's stolen passport from 1999 – the same passport that floated safely to the ground with a few burnt edges on 9-11. These strange inconsistencies tend to give support to Mohammed Atta's father's claim that he spoke over the phone with his son on September 12th, the day after the attacks. Could a group of professionals have abducted and killed the real Atta in the days following the 9-11 attacks? Mossad agents, posing as "art students" were arrested after conducting some kind of operation in Hollywood, Florida, the same town that Atta stayed in! So what happened to the real Mohammed Atta? To quote his grief stricken father: "Ask Mossad!"
kathaksung
Statesman
Statesman
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 2:46 am
Location: San Jose, Ca.

Postby kathaksung » Sun Oct 08, 2006 8:45 pm

Human have hound in their house to protect their family against the wolf. As the hound getting more power, they don't want to be guard any more. They want to be master. So the hound trained some wolf they captured. Let these agent wolf to attack and kill human. Human is frightened. They give hound whatever they wanted, equipment, power ..... Now hound become master. When they need something, they let the agent wolf have an attack on human, then said, this is a long war, to protect your lives, I need warrantless surveillance, more budget, torture prison.... . The hound repeated its demand, "This enemy has struck us, and they want to strike us again, and we'll give our folks the tools necessary to protect the country," if you don't then the hound "can not protect ourselves".

That's why we saw after 5 years, occasionally a wolf or two were captured. But hundreds of thousands of innocent people died. There is an endless war to control people. A constant blackmail for more power. If Chavez says it's devil, he may say truth.
kathaksung
Statesman
Statesman
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 2:46 am
Location: San Jose, Ca.

Postby kathaksung » Tue Oct 17, 2006 9:15 pm

440. October surprise (10/5/06)

Foely sex scandal; the cover up trouble of Hastert; Rice was pre-warned of 911 attack .... All happened years ago but surge in this October. It's a blackmail. Demos have no ability to do so. The master mind is the Inside Group. They control media and intelligence. When CIA come out to prove they have warned Condoleezza Rice about the coming terror attack two months before 911, we saw the result of the Port Goss' resignation 4 months ago. GOP lost the control of CIA. It now becomes a weapon against themselves.

What do they want this time? A law to expand their police power? (warrantless surveillance), control of DOD? (replace Rumsfelt), or bigger, war on Iran.

They need the approval of Capital Hill on all of these. Republicans control the House and the Senate. So the people having trouble this time are all GOP.

Though media says Demo will win in Mid-term election, it is a propaganda. To put more pressure on GOP, to squeeze more concession from them.

So probably there will be an October surprise. Another terror attack in US, (likely a dirty bomb attack) to justify another war. Like what 911 has done. Thus, GOP will still remain in control. Anyhow, the inside group prefers a war-loving Party.

The October surprise will be a big event, a nice distract for a framed case. I received a letter from an inspecting company in the end of September. It says they are authorized by my insurance company to inspect my house (exterior) in next few weeks. That I should examine the photo ID of their representative if I am home. I think it is part of Feds' October plan. I have my fire policy with that insurance company for 20 years. This is the first time they request an inspection. Feds know I am home all the time. They have no problem to have any ID. The inspecting company may belong to an Inspecting Bureau.

Not a coincidence, my wife is arranged for a China tour between 10/10 to 10/18. Her last tour was in later September last year when a big framed case had been arranged on 9/24/05.
Though she cooperated with Feds she had been planned to death in each framed case.

Beware of an October surprise.
kathaksung
Statesman
Statesman
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 2:46 am
Location: San Jose, Ca.

Postby kathaksung » Fri Oct 27, 2006 9:41 pm

442. Lidle's air crash in New York.(10/15/06)

The "passport" event made me think this is a designed case.

1. Timing. This is October, one month before mid-term election. Bush administration is losing the confidence of public. More people believe 9/11 was a government inside job. This administration will do something big to keep the control of the senate and the Congress.

2. Motive. To cover up a 9/11 flaw. Many people thought 9/11 leader Atta's passport was a plant. This case repeats the event to convince people that a passport survive from an impact and a huge fire is common. But do you bring your passport with you when you have a domestic travel? A drive license is enough for such a tour. Both Atta and Lidle took a domestic travel.

There might be a slim chance for the survival of the passport if Atta and Lidle put their passport on the pilot deck instead of put it in their pocket or in the travel bags. But have you ever seen people behave in such way?

3. A small plane is easier to handle then a big commercial air plane. Its speed is much slower than a commercial plane. To turn around a plane should be a basic operation for a pilot. How could a pilot with one year experience and a fly instructor not know it? A mistake impossible to take place.

4. Purpose of the plot. The accident resembles 9/11. In election time, to remind people of the terror attack happened 5 years ago. Bush is said doing nothing good but having only led in poll that he is tough against terrorist. (though the terror attack were activated by his own group in the name of terrorists)
The accident is a psychological operation to help GOP in coming election.

5. Another possible purpose is to justify a coming terror attack. There is reason for Bush group to organize another terror attack to keep grabbing the control of Capital Hill. So if such an attack happens, government will say, see, for a small plane, we can hardly do anything on it. Or, more likely, they shoot down the "perpetrator's plane" and declare a victory against terrorists. All words are from an unilateral side. Because in all these cases, so said "terrorists" were dead. (911 attack, Madrid bombing, London bombing) That's why the media prefer "suicide bombing " report. How easy is it? Just employ a poverty, tell him to deliver a bag to the target area. Plant a remote control bomb inside the bag. Then a "suicide bombing" is done. Or create a "terror cell" by its informant.

6. For a broad influence, a celebrity used to be chosen. So people will set their eyes on it. Unfortunately, Lidle was chosen in this case.
We can see the same tactic was used in Michael Jackson case. Michael Jackson was arrested the same day when Bush visited London. It was used to distract public's attention from the humiliation of Bush. Bush met with a historical big protest of British people in London for his war crime that day.

We also can see it in recent Karr's case. Intelligence applied Jon Ramsey Benet
case on Kar to attract attention all over the country. Kar was freed on DNA evidence. The purpose of the case is to convince people that DNA is decisive in the case. For the propaganda, they borrowed famous Jon Ramsey Benet case.

7. The possible method in this accident.
We know drone is largely used in Afghan war and Iraq war. The news once reported Bin Laden was killed in a drone's missile attack. The remote control skill is now a popular technique.

911 attack was practiced in this way. So did in the Lidle's tragedy.
The only thing they had done was to install a remote control kit inside the Lidle's plane. Once the plane was in the air, what they did was to cut the manual control and let the remote control kit take over the pilot.

Whatever Lidle and the flight instructor try to do resulted nothing. They had to eye their plane flying to the building. They even couldn't escape by emergent kit because they lost control of the plane.

8. The biggest question here is: How could these Arabic flight school students so accurately pilot those modern, high speed, complex commercial planes to their targets (Remember that none was missing the target) while a pilot with one year experience along with a flight school instructor couldn't handle a small, easy handling plane?

Quote, "Stephen M. St. John
Precursors to Remote-Controlled Flights of 9/11?
Tue May 2, 2006 18:17

The 9/11 Commissioners ignored indications of remote control piloting of the jets of 9/11 brought forward by retired Army Colonel Donn de Grand Pre (among others), who had convened within days of 9/11 a meeting of military, commercial and civilian aviators and experts. Their conclusions, which De Grand Pre reported to the highest levels of the Pentagon, were that the jets of 9/11 could not possibly have been flown the way they were flown by Arab flight students and that the best explanation for these flights was that they were flown by remote control during the peak activities of multiple NORAD drills.

http://disc.server.com/discussion.cgi?d ... pagemark=4
kathaksung
Statesman
Statesman
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 2:46 am
Location: San Jose, Ca.

443. October surprise (2) (10/20/06)

Postby kathaksung » Wed Nov 08, 2006 10:41 pm

443. October surprise (2) (10/20/06)

For the mid-term election, to keep Bush's war party in bench, the Inside Group may have planned a big "terror attack".

1. The dirty bomb attack. The nuclear test in North Korea was not a coincidence. US may manipulate N. Korea through China. In my previous messages you know the secret police of China and US having a close collaboration.

The dirty bomb attack, not only will help Bush's party in coming election, but also justify a new Mid-east war - Bombing Iran.

2. A bio-attack. In October, there was a news said that FBI scientist Douglas Beecher thought the anthrax used in September - October 2001 attack "were not prepared using advanced techniques and additives to make them more lethal". That "A clever high school student" could make such a preparation, according to Ronald Atlas, former president of the American Society for Microbiology and co-director of the Center for Hearlth hazards Preparedness at the University of Louisville.

Combine with the "discovery of Lidle's passport" event, it reveals that FBI start a mission to cover up the flaws they made in "9/11 attack" and tried to "solve" it by scapegoat. So another bio-attack may happen too in this October.

The Lidle's small plane air crash in New York was not a coincidence, too. It was a psychological operation to pre-plant the mind of American people that a small plane attack is hard to prevent.

The dirty bomb attack or bio-attack may be carried out by small plane. All they have to do is to install a dirty bomb and remote control kit in a training plane. Then instruct a "terror cell" member to take a flight lesson. The rest we saw in Lidle's case. Of course, before the "terror cell" join the flight school, he must take an oath about "jihad" or royal to Al Qaida or something like that. Which will later be discovered as a convenient evidence the way we are now so familiar with. Either by finding a passport in street, a plan in his laptop computer, or a tape mailed to Al Jazzera.....

26 years ago, there had been an October surprise. A secret deal made between Bush Sr. and Iran in Paris. Iran would keep on detaining the 52 American Embassy hostages to humiliate Demo President candidate Jimmy Carter to guarantee GOP's victory of 1980 presidency campaign. As promised, Iranians released the hostages on the inauguration day of Reagan and Bush Sr. What was the payment? Arms and weapons which Iran needed. Which was later known as "Iran - Contra" scandal. Oliver North became a scapegoat in that case. The story government told people was that CIA selling weapons to Iran to exchange money to support anti-Contra movement in Latin America.

But do you believe that CIA was so poor that it had to sell weapons to its enemy for money? How could they pick up one of the biggest enemies - Iran as buyer when there were so many other buyers?

26 years ago they bribed our enemy to detain American hostages for the power of presidency. 5 years ago they killed Americans in the name of "terrorists" in order to have war in Middle-east. Now, for the war on Iran and the power of the Houses, what things can't they do?

Don't be blinded by the show of "hostility of North Korea". North Korea is as hostile as Iran to US. If the Inside Group could make secret deal with Iran then, why not with North Korea this time?
kathaksung
Statesman
Statesman
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 2:46 am
Location: San Jose, Ca.

Postby kathaksung » Wed Nov 22, 2006 9:36 pm

445. Dirty bomb attack (10/30/06)

In early October, the step down of GOP House leader - Hastert, was a hot issue. There was also a newly released information that Condoleeza Rice was briefed twice of the coming attack two months before 9/11/2001 which also could have become a hot issue in election time. Then, all these issues fade off from the media. That is unusual in election time. Why?

Those issues were used by the Inside Group to extort Bush and his Republican government to expand the Mid-East war - an attack on Iran. For this war, they have prepared a justification - another "terror attack" on US which resembles 9/11. I revealed their plot in advance.

Bush administration is willing to follow the order of the Inside Group. Only their plot was alerted. A revealed plot is a soured plot. That was not their fault. So the extortion is unnecessary any more. Now Hastert plays well in his stage; and no more word about government pre-knowledge of 9/11 attack.

I think I was very correct to alert people that "So probably there will be an October surprise. Another terror attack in US, (likely a dirty bomb attack) to justify another war." (see "440. October surprise (10/5/06)")

The plot:
On 10/9, North Korea had a nuclear test.
On 10/11, Lidle's small plane crashed to a sky-rise in New York.
On 10/12, a warning of dirty bomb attack was posted in internet which claimed seven NFL football stadiums will be hit with radiological "dirty bombs". (That warning was reported one week later by media, the news on 10/21 said it was a hoax. )
On 10/15, media reported FBI raising questions over anthrax case five years later.

I don't think it was a coincidence that all of these happened at this time. The "dirty bomb hoax" could become true if the plot was not alerted in advance. The big casualty could give Bush an excuse to bomb Iran's nuclear plant.

On 10/26, the KTSF Chinese TV reported such a news that China arrested two North Koreans whom tried to sell ** gram of Uranium. (The news was not seen in other media, though) It will justify the source of dirty bomb if the attack happens.

There were conflict report about North Korea. One said N. Korea apologized to China and assured there were no second nuclear test. One said the busy test site means a second test is possible. It may reflect the conflict psycho of the Inside Group. They manipulate N. Korea through China. N. Korea did the test to the secret deal. The Inside Group has to make a payment. For not waste that payment, the plot may go on. So be careful with the "dirty bomb" or "anthrax attack'. Otherwise how can they explain if GOP still keep the control of Houses of Congress after election?
kathaksung
Statesman
Statesman
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 2:46 am
Location: San Jose, Ca.

PreviousNext

Return to Fascist Tyranny in America

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron