It is not a war on terror. It is a war of terror
The fake war on terror could not have been sold to the public with out the false-flag 9/11 terrorist attacks, and more importantly, DoD and FEMA could not have pulled off 9/11 without getting the media in all NATO countries invovled in this major act of treason.
911 Octopus explores how the media had an active role in 9/11, and how it would not have been possible to go through with the attack without their help. It is a movie well worth viewing.
Latin Fight for U.N. Security Council Seat Ends - nytimes.com
A turning point against Venezuela’s effort to win the seat seemed to come during a speech by Mr. Chávez at the United Nations in September, when he ridiculed Mr. Bush as the devil. That comment appeared to influence some of the diplomats who decided to vote for Guatemala. Still, Mr. Chávez’s description of Mr. Bush played well with many people in Venezuela, where wariness over the tacit approval by the United States of the brief coup that ousted Mr. Chávez in 2002 has pervaded relations between the two countries.
Sometimes relations tilt toward the surreal. The National Assembly, which is controlled by Mr. Chávez’s supporters, recently called on the Bush administration to explain why it had carried out the attack on the World Trade Center.
Even the NY Times have trouble completely ignoring 9/11 now that both Venezuela and Iran have publicly asked why the Bush administration carried out the 9/11 attacks… Oh, one last little detail: No NATO-member or partner government has publicly questioned the official 9/11 story. If your government is not questioning the official story then you are not in a truly free country.
Technorati Tags: 11. september 2001, 9/11, 911, Venezuela
1000 people in Sweden were asked “Which of the following countries do you view as the biggest threat to world peace?”, and the options were Israel, China, Russia, USA, North-Kora and Iran.
The country viewed as the biggest threat to world peace, named by almost one of three, or 29 percent, is the USA.
Now, this is not a big deal. It is a small deal. Only lousy 1000 people were asked. But it’s there.
It should be mentioned that Sweden is only a partner member of the NATO alliance, and national-covering television stations like TV 4 have aired 9/11 documentaries like “Loose Change” time and time again. Sweden also have a huge 9/11-Truth movement based around the forum Vaken.se. The other Scandinavian countries Norway and Denmark, who are tyrannical NATO-full-member regimes, still parrot the official US government 9/11 story and the Whitehouse party line, and still covertly torture citizens for telling the truth about 9/11. Thus; such polls in these criminal regimes would likely have different outcomes that polls done in the more liberal Kingdom of Sweden.
It should also be mentioned that Axess Television, who ordered this poll, is an independent non-profit news organization. This gives their polls more credit than the usual manipulated-to manufacture-consent by claiming it is the majorities opinion polls done by the Swedish government and their agencies (if you don’t know how this works: Polling is mainly done for two reasons: a) You are spewing out propaganda and want to find out if your propaganda is accepted or rejected in order to adjust the propaganda, or b) you claim the majority have a view, regardless of anyone actually having that view, in order to make the public agree with the view under the assumption that it is the view of the majority).
Perhaps the numbers would be different if more people were asked. Or informed, the number of people viewing the USA as the most dangerous nation on earth would likely be different if they had seen just a fraction of the evidence now in the Internet which clearly shows 9/11 was an inside job.
Regardless. 29% out of 1000 supposedly representative Swedish people now view the USA as the worlds #1 bad-guy.
You can view the television program where this poll is presented at Axxess.se, the direct link to their WMV9/WMV2 stream is mms://qstream-wm.qbrick.com/05076//05076_3536_4_all.wmv. (It’s really not that interesting, it’s just supposed “expert” Hans Blix being interviewed – who pretends he doesn’t know anything about the Downing Street Memo and seriously thinks the US “found out” there were no WMD weapons in Iraq after they invaded by “mistake”. Thus; Hans Blix is a dumb-as-a-cow ignorant idiot, despite all his experience – OR – he’s secretly a nazi-supporting fascist).
Every added a piece of factual information with numerous references to Wikipedia and found that someone discretely removed after a short while?
Ever wondered if the true reason was that someone felt the information was too relevant and too important to let the general public know about it? Or simply found that the only plausible reason for the information being removed was that it simply went against everything your government and predominant media would have people believe?
9/11 is a great was to test just how strictly censored Wikipedia projects really are and who actually removes factual information that goes against everything the predominant media would have people believe. The demolition of the three WTC towers are now so well documented, so obvious, so undeniable fact that removing the fact is a clear giveaway of a government-payed CoIntelPro terrorist. Such terrorist vary, some pretend to be writers or political activist and spend their whole life doing CoIntelPro, others are just stupid Hitler-Jugend students looking for a hand-out. Others pretend to work some regular government job while they in reality are working for the military or an intelligence agency. But regardless of cover: they all have one thing in common. They tend to attempt to get themselves into positions where they are best suited to spread disinformation and restrict the flow of true and factual information.
Many 9/11 researches have tried to edit the English Wikipedia and found that it is over-run by governemtn CoIntelPro terrorist who replace factual information with provable lies, including:
It is clear from my own experience and numerous other people that the English Wikipedia project is tightly regulated and has absolutely no room for true and factual objective information.
How about localized Wikipedia projects?
I tried to add some factual referenced material to the Norwegian Wikipedia project no.wikipedia.org) a year ago and found that it was removed immediately, without a comment, with out any explanation or reason. And worse, the IP address I was using got banned just for adding factual information.
I decided to look into this now, a year later, to find out just how strict the censorship really is at the Norwegian Wikipedia project and also exactly who does the censorship.
A dozen or so removed edits later, guess what I found?
The administrators are the only ones who edit away factual information, and they consequently block the users, and IPs, who add factual information with references. Then they remove the facts and replace it with blatant lies who violate basic laws of physics.
These guys all know the truth about 9/11 and are desperately trying to cover it up at the Norwegian Wikipedia by blocking users who tell the truth followed by discrete removals of factual information:
It is interesting to note that the only one above who even attempted to justify removing factual information was Peter J. Acklan, an admitted government employe of Avinor – who happen to be closely connected to the Royal Norwegian Airforce and the Norwegian military…
He had this to say about five references added with information about the destruction of the WTC towers:
“Your sources are websites with authors who do not even tell who they are. They are not very reliable.”
Judge for yourself.
The five web pages in question where:
It does not take much to find http://www.crispinsartwell.com/bio.htm at that site, which states that it is authored by Crispin Sartwell.
Gordon J. Ross, strangely enough, does not give his name anywhere on the website. But he does provide his e-mail address, and anyone genuily interessted could easily have e-mailed and asked. Although, that would probably not be needed to an observant person because this document was also used as a reference in the edit in question:
By Craig T. Furlong and Gordon Ross. Right there on the refence. Yet Wikipedia-administrator Peter J. Acklan tries to claim that the sources are documents written anonymous people and are therefore not reliable?
Dr. Judy Wood, “professor of Mechanical Engineering”. Clearly stated right there on the page. You would have to be blind not to see it, if you actually visit that page. You would also have to be blind and dumb-as-a-cow to not realize that the official government story is impossible – if you actually read the information on that site.
And the last, reference, “by anonymous people”, get ready for this one:
This page actually states that the buildings collapsed in 10 seconds. Right there on the government page. So what? Everybody knows that. Everybody?
The problem with that particular page on the 9/11 Commission is that the “official” story the administrators of the Norwegian Mediawiki website are trying to push is that the buildings gradually weakened and fell down very slowly. Yes. Most of the administrators just blatantly removes factual information, and then administrator Jan Bojer Vindheim re-writes history and puts in their version of the redicilous government story – which is, oddly enough, an even more outragous rose-red fairy-tale than the official US government story.
They are actually, seriously, trying to push that the buildings collapsed almost immediately after the aircraft hit the buildings and remove the simple extremely-well-documented undisputed fact that WTC1 and WTC2 stood standing for 56 and 102 minutes before the demolition (and they also, obviously, consequently hide the fact that the actual demolitions, or “collapse” as they call it, only took 8.4 and 10.2 seconds).
So there you have it. The Norwegian Wikipedia is run by a few fascist – excuse the strong term, but that is the most accurate description – who even remove references to the official 9/11 commission report in order to promote their own even-more-whitewashed rose-red version of the offial story!
Oh. Just some advice. Use a privacy-protecting system like Tor if you want to attempt to edit Wikipedia – specially if you want to add factual information to small localized Wikipedia projects. You never know who’s running them, and the above administrators of the Norwegian Wikipedia are highly suspect – to put it gently.
Technorati Tags: Wikipedia, Wikis, Wiki, Censorship, 9/11, 911
You know your media is in a sad state when it takes a comedian to ask the really hard questions about current affairs…
Colbert is not very constructive, nor is he trying to be serious, but at least he sometimes asks some of the questions the rest of the media ignore or simply do not dare ask.
Technorati Tags: Bill Kristol, Stephen Colbert, PNAC
