From: Archibald Scatflinger (TransdimensionalElf@hawaii.rr.com)
Date: Thu Aug 15 2002 - 18:28:08 MDT
9/11: the final dots, part 2: top 20 suspects?
by ewing2001 - August 13, 2002
more information
<http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0208/S00068.htm> full text
11 months later.....an introduction
==================================
Imagine you wake up from a coma and you learn that 11 months ago, an
"Attack on America" destroyed some significant buildings, killed 3,000
people and forced a war against terrorism. You switch on the news and
see pictures of Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel, India and Pakistan.
Someone tells you that 19 hijackers organized kamikaze attacks on the
World Trade Center and Pentagon, on behalf of someone called Osama
Binladin, and that a few weeks later a series of anthrax attacks gave
the nation a further shock.
Someone else claims that the two attacks actually were unrelated.
What do you do? Because you don't trust hearsay, rumors or "memories,"
you try to find your own answers, and see if this story is true.
You search in the biggest library in the world, the Internet, and try to
find reliable, mainstream articles. Where else should you go? You didn't
subscribe to the papers and you did not tape the last 10 months worth of
television.
After many hours on the Net, you finally realize that the articles you
have found contradict each other. Naturally you ask yourself: Who is
lying and who is telling the truth?
In these articles, you come across a great many similar reports about
the same 20 people, all of whom seem to be connected in some way with
both of the attacks. Even if they were not directly involved, these
coincidences look very strange to you. Some among these people are also
connected with each other, as well as having ties to both of the attacks
and to cities and places which are also tied to both attacks.
You ask yourself: Why?
Oddly, you also find out that many of the alleged hijackers are reported
to have worked at military bases, or taken courses at CIA-connected
flight schools.
Why? Which of the articles are true?
In the end, you find out enough evidence demonstrating that these 20
people must have known a lot, but seem to have allowed the attacks to
happen.
You start to speculate if this happened on purpose, because
a) no articles denied their involvement.
b) these same people are among those most frequently demanding more
money be spent against new attacks.
But none of them really seems to know the "official hijackers."
Is that why someone said not to ask questions? You begin to call your
hypothesis the LIHOP: Letting It Happen On Purpose. Why did they let the
9/11 attack happen on purpose? Who are the people behind these people?
You want to find answers in public, but few are those who are willing to
even entertain these questions. Even more oddly, there has been no
public investigation of 9/11. No commission has been appointed. Plans
for investigations have been repeatedly postponed. No one seems to know
anything about a new start. All this is said to be for reasons of
"national security."
Why?
Who are these people, and why did they let the attacks happen on
purpose? Why are these people NOT really connected with Binladin? Why
has no one in the mainstream media written about them? Why has Binladin
not been found? Why, "all of a sudden," does the US Government plan to
start a war against Iraq? Why are lawmakers who leaked information about
prior warnings of the Sept. 11th attacks being asked to take lie
detector tests?
Why are so many other questions still unanswered, as one website,
http://www.unansweredquestions.org claims?
Even more odd: Why is it that this website is supported by reliable
sources who once worked for the government? Even more "strange": Why do
so many relatives of the 9/11 victims support this initiative to force
out answers?
Why are these particular relatives of 9/11 victims not receiving any
public attention? Has everyone forgetten them?
Which members of the government are lying, and why? Why do the 911
relatives also want answers? Did they also fall into a coma after the
attacks?
Now imagine that just as you have asked these questions, you suddenly
fall into a second coma, and when you wake up this time - some months
later - someone tells you that Iraq has been accused of sending the
anthrax, and that U.S. troops have been bombing it for months, and that
it's all starting to look like World War III?
After this second coma, you learn that Afghanistan looks to be in better
shape now, thanks to the building of an oil pipeline, and the toleration
of the drug business. You also learn that the recession is considered to
be over, that the smart money has moved back into the market to buy
stocks in the makers of biopharmaceuticals, facial recognition systems,
personal control chips, and, of course, weapons.
After your second coma, you decide once again to go to the Internet, to
see if you can find out what is really happening. But wait, what if this
Internet has been shut down - for "national security" reasons? Who could
you ask then?
This is what this article is about. It should be discussed in public, on
national and public access TV.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:53 MDT