Du bist Terrorist

Du bist Terrorist (You are a Terrorist) english subtitles from lexela on Vimeo.

Spinning torture

Notice that MSNBC's coverage of the story on torture seeking a confession of a link between Iraq and Al Qaeda is based on alleged torture of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who is not reported to have confessed to such a link, and not on the alleged torture of Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, who is reported to have revealed such a link.



This supports the argument that what Khalid Sheikh Mohammed said about 9/11 was true, while avoiding the difficult problem of the death of Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, and the fact that a tortured confession was in fact offered to the United Nations as justification for the Iraq invasion.

http://www.andyworthington.co.uk/2009/05/13/two-experts-cast-doubt-on-ibn-al-shaykh-al-libis-suicide/

The alleged link given by Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi was actually used in Colin Powell's February 2003 address to the United Nations, and the alleged attempts to torture KSM to establish a link occurred after this. So why the focus on KSM, when it is the al-Libi confession that was actually used at the United Nations?

http://www.andyworthington.co.uk/2009/04/29/even-in-cheneys-bleak-world-the-al-qaeda-iraq-torture-story-is-a-new-low/

Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi: the tortured lie that underpinned the Iraq war

In case anyone has forgotten, when Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, the head of the Khaldan military training camp in Afghanistan, was captured at the end of 2001 and sent to Egypt to be tortured, he made a false confession that Saddam Hussein had offered to train two al-Qaeda operatives in the use of chemical and biological weapons. Al-Libi later recanted his confession, but not until Secretary of State Colin Powell — to his eternal shame — had used the story in February 2003 in an attempt to persuade the UN to support the invasion of Iraq.

Weidlinger Associates and President Bush seem to disagree on what killed most of the people on 9/11

Lead structural engineer for investigation that determined that the collapse of one WTC tower did not cause or contribute to the collapse of the other.

http://www.weidlinger.com/projectslist.aspx?cat=450&type=400&print=true

An investigation of the collapses of the World Trade Center towers was performed by a pre-eminent group of engineering firms led by Weidlinger Associates. The study, conducted on behalf of the attorneys for Silverstein Properties, Inc., is the most comprehensive study to date of why the Twin Towers stood for as long as they did and why they ultimately collapsed. The results of the study were released to the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the federal agency charged with conducting an in-depth investigation of the causes of the collapses. The study established that the strength and redundancy of the superstructure of the towers initially allowed them to withstand the high-speed impact of the Boeing 767s and that the subsequent collapses were initiated separately by a combination of immediate damage from the impact of the airliners and the resulting fires on the floors that were struck.

http://www.weidlinger.com/project.aspx?id=1817&type=400&cat=450

According to Levy, little could be done to prevent the buildings' destruction, considering the damage the planes had caused. However, he feels that a more effective rescue-plan could have saved more people.

"A critical aspect of the event was the location of the fire stairs," he noted. "They were clustered around the centers of the buildings and were made unusable when the explosions occurred. That is why almost everyone on the lower floors managed to get out and almost no one from the upper floors escaped."

This destruction of the fire escapes and the fact that it took firefighters almost an hour to reach the upper floors accounted for most of the lives lost. Though the New York Fire Department was using the most sophisticated technology available, Weidlinger determined that a more efficient system for putting out high-rise fires needs to be developed.

. . .

Weidlinger's study was done on behalf of Larry Silverstein for the purpose of his insurance claim. In its investigation the firm used advanced computer modeling, photo and video analyses, and original engineering plans for the World Trade Center.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3601/is_39_49/ai_101679160/

Various analyses of the buildings' destruction, including those of Weidlinger Associates and NIST, are discussed by Jeff King here:

http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/Confronting%20the%20Evidence/what_failed_and_how.htm

King points out that Matthys P. Levy, chairman of Weidlinger Associates Inc., stated that for the "collapses" to appear as they did, all of the core columns must have failed simultaneously.

Weidlinger Associate's report is summarized here:

http://enr.construction.com/news/buildings/archives/021025.asp

I am most interested in the assertion, based on this report that was commissioned by attorneys and presumably submitted in the insurance case in federal court, that most of the people died as a result of the plane impacts blocking the fire stairs, and firemen not being able to get up to the fires.

I am still waiting for the "9/11 Truth and Justice" physicist Steven Jones, and for the "Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth," to make a serious critique of NIST's crash physics claims in NIST NCSTAR 1-2.

http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/NCSTAR1-2index.htm

Let me repeat a quote from the Real Estate Weekly, which is accurate:

This destruction of the fire escapes and the fact that it took firefighters almost an hour to reach the upper floors accounted for most of the lives lost.

What really happened to the stairs, and what really happened to the elevators?

President Bush, channeling "Khalid Sheikh Mohammed," told a much more plausible version of events:

"For example, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed described the design of planned attacks of buildings inside the U.S. and how operatives were directed to carry them out. That is valuable information for those of us who have the responsibility to protect the American people. He told us the operatives had been instructed to ensure that the explosives went off at a high -- a point that was high enough to prevent people trapped above from escaping."

Joseph Stiglitz on an easy and cheap fix

Create new banks.


Stiglitz was able to elaborate more on this at Davos, without stupid questions from CNBC talking heads:

http://dailybail.com/home/2009/2/15/bank-bailout-news-video-from-the-world-economic-forum-at-dav.html


Instead, investment banks are allowed to stash billions offshore and have their bad bets covered by the taxpayer. This is so outrageous - looting on a monumental scale.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2009/03/23/big_clawback/

Receivership, now.

http://www.hussmanfunds.com/wmc/wmc090323.htm

Though I believe that the consequences (via credit default swaps and the like) are overstated of letting bondholders take a haircut, and will ultimately be no worse than having the public take the losses, the fact is that we don't even need the bonds of major financial institutions to go into default. What we do need to do is offer those bondholders a choice:

1) The U.S. government takes receivership of the financial institution, changes the management, wipes out the stockholders and a chunk of the bondholders claims entirely, continues the operation of the institution in receivership, eventually reissues the company to private ownership, and leaves the bondholders with the residual. This is not “nationalization,” but receivership – a form of “pre-packaged bankruptcy” that protects the customers and allows the institution to continue to operate, followed by re-privatization. As I've previously noted, this would fully protect all of the customers and depositors at no probable expense to the public. Alternatively;

2) The bondholders voluntarily agree to move a portion of their claims lower down in the capital structure, swapping debt for equity (preferred or common), allowing the bank to have a larger cushion of Tier-1 capital, avoiding insolvency, and hopefully allowing the bank to recover by its own bootstraps, preferably assisted by debt restructuring on the borrower side (via property appreciation rights and the like). Similar debt/equity swaps would be an appropriate strategy toward failing U.S. automakers as well.

Good Bank, not Bad Bank:

http://blogs.ft.com/maverecon/2009/03/dont-touch-the-unsecured-creditors-clobber-the-tax-payer-instead/

And finally, an excellent blogpost pointing out that nationalization is happening now, but of the downside only:

http://www.interfluidity.com/posts/1235210036.shtml

We are all tired of the lies, Mr. Geithner. By all means, let nationalization be a last resort, and do all you can to offer liquidity to private parties willing to take both the upside and downside of speculating in questionable paper. But if you keep nationalizing the downside and privatizing the upside, it will not be very long at all before the public concludes that stress tests and market prices are just a sleight-of-hand for Davos man while he picks our pockets, again. Act fairly, and you may end up nationalizing the worst few of the larger banks. Keep up the games, and we will insist that you nationalize them all. It is getting hard to believe that there is a banker in the land who has not already robbed us. Eventually we will tire of drawing fine distinctions.

Ya think?

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=227162

The bandwagon of authorities has a new seat

Medical Professionals for 9/11 Truth

http://mp911truth.org/

Make that two new seats:

Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth

http://pl911truth.com/

joining these:

Patriots Question 9/11

http://patriotsquestion911.com/

Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth

http://www.ae911truth.org/

Firefighters for 9/11 Truth

http://firefightersfor911truth.org/

Pilots for 9/11 Truth

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/

Lawyers for 9/11 Truth

http://www.l911t.com/

Religious Leaders for 9/11 Truth

http://rl911truth.org/index.php

Coming: Cerebral Cortexed for 9/11 Common Sense

I am happy to see these people speaking out. But please remember, the bandwagon effect and appeals to authority are why so many Americans believed the patently absurd official lies in the first place.

Representative Kanjorski: Dupe or Shill?

In the video linked below, we see Congressman Paul Kanjorski (D-PA, 11th District) on CSPAN, responding to a citizen's criticism of the September 2008 bailout by claiming as follows:

"On Thursday Sept 15, 2008 at roughly 11 AM The Federal Reserve noticed a tremendous draw down of money market accounts in the USA to the tune of $550 Billion dollars in a matter of an hour or two.

Money was being removed electronically.

The treasury tried to help with $150 Billion.

But could not stem the tide.

It was an electronic run on the banks

The treasury intervened but had they not closed down the accounts they estimated that by 2 PM that afternoon. Within 3 hours. $5.5 Trillion would have been withdrawled and collapsed and within 24 hours the world economy."

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ca2_1234032281


And here we have a strong showing that this was false:

http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/market-movers/2009/02/11/kanjorski-and-the-money-market-funds-the-facts

With the Kanjorski Meme still spreading (see Ben Smith, Andrew Leonard, Moldbug, and more), I think I'm finally able to squash it with some hard figures: there never was a $500 billion outflow from any asset class in the space of a couple of hours or even weeks, and the Fed never shut down or froze any money-market accounts.