——-
Commentary: Frankly, I was not surprised one bit when the NY Supreme Court rejected the referendum. Several things are absolutely clear to me:
a) The USA is run by a powerful Nomenklatura which, just like in the old USSR, has absolute control of all branches of government and the US corporate media.
b) It is obvious from day 1 that Nomenklatura would under no circumstances allow for a real, independent, subpoena-empowered 9/11 investigation. It went as far as to try nominate – of all people! – Henry Kissinger to head the first 9/11 Commission (only protests by the victim’s families made them back down).
c) There is overwhelming evidence of a massive and multi-layered cover up of the real circumstances of the events of September 11th 2001.
d) There is strong body of circumstantial and corroborating (and even, in some cases, direct) evidence which points to the fact that, at the very least, elements of the following governments were directly involved in 9/11: US, Israel, Pakistan. Furthermore, the Zionist Lobby and its puppets are dead set against the 9/11 Truth movement. It is reasonable to conclude from this that it has a vital interest in denying a real investigation into what really happened that day.
The rejection of the NYCCAN referendum was therefore the only possible outcome.
I personally suspect that should the truth about the 9/11 events come out, it would shed such a light on the control of the US Nomenklatura over the USA that it could lead to its overthrow by an overt rebellion of an outraged the general public. That is the only logical conclusion I can come to. The efforts to investigate and ascertain the true circumstances of the 9/11 events might therefore well be the single most powerful political weapon in the hands of the anti-imperialists to overthrow the imperial Nomenklatura which currently occupies the USA.
The Saker
Saker,
While I personally believe OBL was behind 9/11 I am sure the powers that be have an interest in letting sleeping dogs lie… I think there are tales of incompetence that they want to hide (just read Bacevichs book “The Limits of Power” where he describes how a SAC B-29 bomber crashed was kept top secret and away from the families of the dead crew, just to hide shoddy maintainance and procedures.
But you are spot on with the Nomenklatura comment.
PS
Just in Belgium for an interview…. it’s clean and the trains run fast and on time. What a contrast to the US …
@FkDahl: BELGIUM!! One of the nicest countries in Europe. First, the Belgians are fantastic people (on par with the Spanish and Irish I would say). Secondly – food is awesome in Belgium (talk about a contrast with the USA!). And third, the Beligians know how to enjoy life. I had a great time there and I am always nostalgic when I hear about Belgium.
As for 9/11 – I also think that OBL was involved. And there is no doubt that Van der Lubbe did try to set the Reichstag on fire. But the Reichstag did not burn down because of Van der Lubbe and the Twin Towers did not turn into small particules dust because of the planes impacting them and their fuel burning (nevermind WTC7 which no plane hit at all).
Incompetance can explan why jet fighters did not intercept the hijacked flights, and incompetence can explain why the hijackers were not intercepted by the FBI & Co. while living in the USA.
But incompetence does NOT explain why WTC1 WTC2 and WTC7 crashed down. The only possible explanation is that this was a case of controlled demolition (and since nanothermite was actually found in the dust the proof is even direct).
You cannot rig 3 major and highly protected buildings in the middle of NYC with hundereds of tons of high explosives and then bring them down neatly inside their own footprint by incompetence. Doing that requiers a great deal of competence (and authority I would add).
OBL and al-Qaeda did not have that kind of means. Only one actor could have had the means to do this: some (or all) of the US government. 9/11 could not have happened without a premeditated involvment of Uncle Shmuel.
Cheers,
VS
Hi Saker,
You’ve been blogging about 9/11 truth for awhile, but I just don’t follow you. I’m of the opinion that if you ram a big enough jet going at a high enough speed into any building, it would collapse. It wouldn’t suprise me if evidence emerged that some subset of the intelligence services had a better idea of what was going on than is publicly acknowledged(they were able to produce a home video starring OBL soon enough),but there is just no evidence of anything beyond that.
I think the situation you posit, that the twin towers were rigged with explosives set to go off right after the plane strikes is problematic because of just how technically challenging such an enterprise would be. It would take a team of hundreds, and that’s not even accounting for the after the fact cover up. While certainly not impossilbe, no US agency has demonstrated this level of competence in recent memory. Far easier just to make sure the pilots hijack big enough planes and ram the buildings at high enough speeds.
While a real inquiry would be welcome, I just don’t understand how people expect something as banal as subpeona power to be able to uncover a conspiracy of the dimensions popularly imagined.
Masoud
@Masoud: I think the situation you posit, that the twin towers were rigged with explosives set to go off right after the plane strikes is problematic because of just how technically challenging such an enterprise would be
Yes, I fully and totally agree. It is mind boggling that such a thing could actually be executed. And this is what kept me in the status of what I called being a “9/11 agnostic” for 8 years. However, here is what happened. You know the saying of Sherlock Holmes “When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”. Well, the evidence that the buildings were brought down by explosives is ABSOLUTELY OVERWHELMING. Denying that just makes no sense. If that is accepted as reality, then – using the Sherlock Holmes approach – just eliminate all the impossible and whatever remains must be the truth. And that is, of course, the thesis that the buildings were rigged with explosives.
Please watch this movie:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4617650616903609314#
And tell me – can you come to ANY other conclusion? Really, do what it, and let me know what you think, ok?
Kind regards,
VS
@Masoud: one more thought. Maybe I should have expressed my key point differently. Like this
THERE IS NO WAY THESE PLANES COULD HAVE BROUGHT DOWN WTC1, WTC2 AND, EVEN LESS SO, WTC7.
You want proof?
Even NIST, the last and most authoritative report, does not have an explanation. So, the US government OFFICIALLY, after 8 years of various investigations cannot come up with a conclusive explanation of what these buildings collapsed. Nevermind that unexploded nanothermite was found in the dust. Even if nothing had been found, there is a physical impossibility that the impact of these planes and the combined fires could have brought down these buildings. Actually, even the basic laws motion of Newton contradict what we see on the videos: near free fall, pulverisation, high speed fragments ejection, molten steel, etc. etc. etc.
EVERYTHING points to the ONLY possible conclusion: explosives were used.