Stranger Than Fiction – Because the news is unbelievable.
Manhattan September 11th 2001 - Tripoli September 11th 2011. Ten years of War Sold On Lies.
Smoke and mirrors. Check the detail over the small arch. Qatar state owned T.V station Al Jazeera broadcast footage from a mock Green Square, as part of the psychological operation as NATO forces entered Tripoli.
The whole pretext for the current NATO military engagement in Libya was to 'protect civillians' (UNSC Resolution.1973)
NATO have been in Libya for six months. According to the new Libyan interim government figures, there's been at least 30.000 deaths and 50,000 injuries during their 'civil war'. ( Aside: Really? How did that happen? Who killed all those people? No-one's said much about all that loss of life.)
With the announcement of these official figures, do our politicial leaders and mainstream media now portray the NATO action as a failure? No. Astonishingly, not. On the contrary, the official line is: ' It's a victory.'
NATO has not just enabled this civil war, they've been it. This war has been the cause of '30,000 deaths and 50,000 injuries' and yet, it's being hailed as a success? How have our perceptions morphed and why do we accept this absurd conclusion? Are we that gullible or just apathetic?
Originally, as a 'no-fly zone' became an all-out bombardment, some reporters did speak with a hint of embarassment, about 'mission-creep' - ie a gradually changing agenda - but politicians and talking heads ( like salivating wolves around a kill ) who at first denied it, pretty soon began to admit it, and it gradually just became acceptable. It was obvious.: ' We', were there until Gaddafi's end. The whole affair has been presented to us repeatedly in our mainstream media as a fight between the terrible dictator and Bogeyman - Gaddafi - the force of evil, and the gallant, freedom fighters - The Rebels - the force of good.
We pay for this trite fantasy through our newspapers, license fees and SKY subscriptions. NATO have carried out a 6 month concerted bombardment of the Libyan people and their infrastructure and have supplied boots on the ground on the front-line via Special Forces in support of violent racist rebels, and they won't leave until Gaddafi is dead or captured. It's mission-leap, rather than creep. Thousands of people have been killed so far. Tens of thousands apparently. We were sold the war on a lie again. It's bloody regime change and blatant daylight robbery of a sovereign nation, but the government and mainstream media are applauding it and calling it a success. Why?
Tony Cartalucci is generally on the money. He points to a screen shot from The Atlantic Council's website saying 'Well Done NATO'. This 'institution' is a good example of those cheering this costly civil war and a reason why these crimes perpetuate.
'The Atlantic Council claims to be a "preeminent, non partisan institution devoted to promoting transatlantic cooperation and international security." It is partnered with NATO and sponsored financially by some of Wall Street and London's largest, most powerful corporate-financier interests. These include many of the big oil interests poised to reap a whirlwind of profits over NATO-backed regime change in Libya, namely BP, Chevron, Exxon, and Shell. It also includes defense contractors already enriched by the protracted bloodshed in Northern Africa including Raytheon, BAE, SAAB Technologies, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, General Dynamics, and Northrop Grumman. Additionally, the world's largest banks and equity firms sponsor Atlantic Council, including Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Deutsche Bank, Barclays Capital, the Blackstone Group, Citigroup, and Credit Suisse Bank. There is also a tremendous amount of foundation support, each with a nefarious back-story worthy of their own thorough examination, including the Carnegie Corporation of New York , the Ford Foundation, and billionaire bankster George Soros' Open Society Institute.
But perhaps most alarming is the Council's sponsorship by a large representation from "reputable" news and media agencies, including Thomson Reuters, News Desk Media, Bloomberg (which includes BusinessWeek), and Google.'
There you go then, a self-proclaimed 'preeminent institution' who say they look to promote 'international security' and who are partners with NATO, are sponsored by the very same huge corporate financier interests who stand to reap great rewards from regime change in Libya, and by media outlets who will report on it all. They are cheering the civil war in Libya and regime change.
So you see, it IS a success! Hurrah!
This, however, exposes a glaring conflict of interest. The whole 'humanitarian' pretext to get us into the war, can be seen as nothing but a cynical sales pitch sold to us by our politicians and through our newspapers and televisions.
Fifty years ago Dwight Eisenhower warned of the 'Military Industrial Complex' and it's 'unwarranted influence'. I would say you could call the current set-up a military-industrial-banking-media complex or perhaps 'a scientific dictatorship' as Cartalucci puts it. it's influence is still unwarranted.
Meanwhile the big globalist players continue with their plan for a re-structuring of the region in line with their geo-political thinking. Syria, the victim of a steady campaign of propaganda and covert funding of rebels from various sources, is a work in progress and the plan would seem to lead inexorably to a wider war in Lebanon and Iran.
In the 1930's United States Marine Corps General Smedley Butler stated, "war is a racket," and explained that a racket is best described "as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small "inside" group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes."
And we pay for it. We buy into it. We gang up against Gaddafi. We fund it. We bank at Barclays, we use Google, we pay our SKY subscriptions, and we go to work so our taxes can be spent at Northrop Grumman on machines which blow-up children. This terrible truth is perhaps why many of us enter into the voluntary suspension of disbelief in the official story. The reality is too unsettling and leads many to wilfully ignore the evidence. Talking of which:
Wake-up - 9/11 Was an Inside Job
It's the ten year anniversary of 9/11 2001 and if you haven't yet, it's a good time to wake up. Understanding the fraud of 9/11 is key to understanding what is really happening in the world. The "War on Terror" is a completely manufactured fraud, brought to us by the same corporate-financier interests who continue to carry out their plans in Libya, Syria, Iran and Algeria et al. 9/11 was a staged event; a spectacular example of false-flag terror. A massive, contrived, murderous, marketing stunt. A mandate to go to war.
And the establishment are worried about the truth coming out. When London Mayor Boris Johnson unveiled a memorial to the victims of 9/11 in London this week he felt the need to say 'Hopefully this will lead to a controlled demolition of the conspiracy theories'. Well, it won't. We have the internet still and once
the fraud is exposed, no amount of money thrown at it can change people's minds. The truth is powerful. The 9/11 Truth movement is growing and nothing can stop it.
The idea of false-flag terrorism comes from the military. Throughout the history of armed conflict Generals have been known to sacrifice parts of their armies and blame it on someone else, for the 'greater good'.
It's an old trick. The sick minds of the architects of the war on terror and 9/11 must somehow justify their actions along these lines. Three thousand dead on 9/11? But just think of the benefits.
In the States there is a large and growing truth movement. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, just one of a host of groups, has the signatures of 15,000 professionals asking for answers. Richard Gage shows architects footage of Building Seven WTC collapsing and that's normally enough. Building Seven was the third skyscraper to completely collapse on 9/11 and is probably the most obvious 'smoking gun' of 9/11. At 5.20pm it collapsed, into it's own footprint, at virtually free-fall speed. There had been some office fires but nothing extensive and it hadn't been hit by a plane. The footage of the collapse shows what looks like a classic controlled demolition. There's a crimp, the penthouse collapses at the top and then it just collapses down on itself. This seems absolutely impossible having suffered the limited damage it had. When the footage was famously shown to a leading Dutch demolition expert Danny Jowenko, without him knowing where it was from, he insisted it was controlled demolition.
It was controlled demolition. Beyond any reasonable doubt.There can be no other explanation.. All the columns would need to fail simultaneously for it to fall like it did and this defies logic without the use of explosive charges. People were even told it was going to collapse and are on record as hearing a countdown. It takes weeks to wire a building for controlled demolition. It must have been done in advance. Insiders must have planned it and if Building Seven was a controlled demolition, then the whole official story of 9/11 falls apart.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9VyIUWeEHk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=877gr6xtQIc
Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it and eventually they will believe you- Joseph Goebbels
Building Seven is just one smoking gun of many surrounding 9/11. People should do their own research and come to their own conclusions. I know that I needed to find out for myself. Much as I'd heard the theories, I didn't believe them until I looked for myself. There's a host of Web Sites and films to watch on-line. When I first started questioning 9/11 I was obsessed. I watched and read everything I could, from all sides. I had to be sure before I started shooting my mouth off about it. It took me two years and hours and hours of research before I started going public, if you will.
Then, I met some people who gave me confidence that I wasn't going mad. One was a 50 year old guy in USAF Intelligence who I met while working on a palliative care ward in a hospital. His view of 9/11 - 'I'm not stupid.( It was obviously an inside job)' and he's an Intelligence officer. Another American was a 69 year old ex engineer who had worked on nuclear submarines and knew people in US government, including Dick Cheney. He was very ill when I knew him but one day found the strength to raise his head from the pillow and snarl ''9/11 was a big con-job and Dick Cheney was a bastard''.
One of the first things that sent chills down my spine when I realised 9/11 was staged was the thought - ''My God. I know this is an inside job. Other people must do too. It's the biggest con of the century, so why is no-one saying anything about it in the mainstream media? The media must be controlled.'' That was a surprise to me. Accepting 9/11 was an inside job meant I had to accept that the mainstream media was very much controlled. Before that,I'd had some faith. That was shattered.
Faith in the state and in our mainstream media is,in-part,what sustains the lies and murderous ventures of the powers that be. To suggest that 9/11 was an inside job has such vast and serious implications. It calls so much in to question. It undermines the entire government and the mainstream media. It accuses our governments of the murder
of their own citizens. Many people faced with this just can't cope and scurry back to the safety of BBC news. 9/11 truth questions their faith in their institutions and they just don't want to go there. Many people are afraid to confront it. Many are wilfully ignorant. Many are afraid to admit it.
It's self-censorship.
With the ten year anniversary of 9/11 here, it's inevitably getting a lot of attention in the media. The establishment is very keen to write the official story of 9/11 into history.
Don't fall for it.
The announcement tonight too, that a terrorist bomb plot by 'US citizens' has been foiled on the eve of the 9/11 anniversary reeks of the crooks, wary of the growing truth movement, looking to frame 'home-grown terrorists'. 9/11 truthers perhaps? It should be expected that dirty tricks will be used on 9/11 truthers the bigger the movement gets.
"It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance."
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Show/hide comment form
