solid -- letter to a progressive (on Moore, Hillary, Pentagon,
elections, elite rule -- who is really for the people, how it will all
play
out)
letter to a progressive (responding to a letter that follows below this
reply):
Too bad I read you letter after unsubscribing from weasle
I thought in an unsually honest response for these times.
You are right about my wanting to proselytize -- a valid criticism.
Do you believe in class warfare? And do you believe that the ruling
class will sometimes conceal their tactics, conceal even the fact
that they are engaging in class warfare? Well I believe that to.
It is my conspiracy theory.
Conflict. Dialectic. Naughty?
You trust Michael Moore and Hillary more than
the people and the remedy of revolution? Hillary
who said "You cant make money without working
for the banks." Who was involved in the murder
of (Jewish) Goldman and (Woman) Nicole Browne
the night before she and husband were first
President and First Lady to testify in a criminal
case, this being the media distraction of the
frame-up of (Black) O. J. SImpson.
I wrote to Moore with the Pentagon evidence. He
did not respond. He ignored. He did cover-up
for the perpetrators.
But if you love and trust the people -- trust that
if they have the truth it will spread and mutate
them so that effective solutions spontaneously
emerge from them -- butterfly effect.
A revolution of men realizing that their politics
have all been manipulated by men who own
the means of production, the land and keep it
for themselves, herding the displaced into large
urban holding pens where their votes are harvested
and where they work as debt-slaves and any
surplus they ac***ulate goes to drugs, alcohol,
****ography, guns and CDs and video rentals
(with big late fees and $30 per bounced check
when they try to stretch it a day -- bounced checks
always counted with the biggest check first!!!)
Progressivism sup****ts the status quo -- and
the hirling leaders of progressivism are sent
by the rich to shut down the middle class
establishments -- and traditionally all innovation,
all job creation, all genuine tie of production
and community has come from the petit
bourgeous small-businessman whom the
progressives help the billionaire corpoations
destroy.
Want to hear the story of Bernard Baruch, the
war financier involved in electing Wilson, in
handling Wilson, killing Wilson's wife and giving
him a hot new girl friend who later married him
and actually ran the country for Baruch and Edward
House while WIlson, like Reagan, and FDR, was
secretly poisoned to incapacity.
I have always felt that if someone would put up
my 9-11 evidence on a website that it would
not be long before the organized-crime government
would be overthrown. One fellow, Brad M, did ]
put me up -- and the results were electrifying --
but suddenly the Batcave website was taken
down and Brad was never told why.
And then suddenly the man I most wanted to
put up my information, Jeff Rense, suddenly
did so -- without consulting me or asking for
my latest and most complete evidence compilation,
he simply put up and old "rough draft" of a web
page that my colleague Mark Bilk and I were
putting together but had put on the back burner
because it was exhausting work with Mark;s
Lennex system and my Windows etc -- anyway,
suddenly rense had this old page of mine up --
and I thought it represented a change of heart,
but soon, after a week it was gone -- why?
why did he change his mind about showing
my evidence and then, just as suddenly, change
it back again? the reason later dawned upon me:
Griffen's book, The New Pearl Harbor, had just
been released (I was not aware of this at the time)
and it discussed the small-plane findings and my
name on three pages -- what Rense did was put
up a page of my work so that people who read
about the small plane thesis would not go looking
for my current and most complete evidence with
live links -- he just wanted to "dead end" people
trying to follow up on The New Pearl Harbor's info.
{I believe Michael Moore's "limited-hangout" cover-up
do***entary was also released to absorb the
attention of the free thinking intelligent with his
mention of old-news old juicy trivia (real 9-11 investigators,
myself included, had told the internet about the
Saudi escape flight following 911 late in 2001!!! but
we also talked about the Israeli guys who were laughing
their heads of in triumph as they videoed the collapsing
world trade center, and when they were de****ted to Israel
told Israeli radio tha they were there to record the event
(not kidding) -- but most of all Michael Moore point
blank conditioned people to conclude: Moore has shown
everything there is to see! Moore is a great journalist!
If any other claims are made about the 911 attacks they
must be false because Moore must have investigated them
and found they were false or else he would have mentioned
them, right?"
I notice that Daniel Hopsicker (on the the great triumviate of
bought off investigators protecting the Pentagon conspirators,
Rivero, Ruppert, Hopsicker) -- Hopsicker tells his readers that
the Commission in its last day, "on the plot" of the hijackers,
"clarified" what happened and answered (he does not say how)
all the "conspiracy theories" etc. -- which of course means
that Hopsicker has declared the fulfillment of the COmmittee
to Investigate Terrorism in Americas second great purpose -- to
cover-up the frame-up (the commission's first great purpose
being to conclude that all intelligence and federal police work
should be put in one great monolithic one-man-rule agency
(with Wolfowitz heading it???)
I believe that rank and file progressives are good hearts,
and the stuff of real liberation and wealth redistribution
and equality and democratization of world's wealth
owner****p and control -- residtributing the land to the
peasants, rather than collectivizing it under the control
of the new class led state.
So tell me -- why does being anti-Zionist based on the
criminal actions of Zionists (I think mostly of Baruch,
and Kissinger, Sharon, and David Rockefeller -- to flesh out
who a Zionist is with faces -- not the Nazi artist characterization
of "da Jooz" -- as I was asking, why does being anti-Zionist
automatically mean "anti-Jewish fascist" -- I get that all the
time!!! I notice that Noam Chomsky's books never mention
the finacial elites, the Rothschild's are not an issue for Chomsky
or for most progressives -- why? is it bacause they occasional
bankroll the left to be their liquidators when a government or the
households of a nation fall too far in arears on their debt payments
(due to manipulation (strategic tightening and loosening) of the
money supply making it easy in one state to get credit and making
it impossible to make loan payments in the other -- at 20 or 30
dollars per bounced check to meet obligations and living expenses,
personal and small business and farm bankruptcies come galloping --
in an economic disaster wealth is not destroyed, it merely changes
hands and it always changes hands upwards.
Still if progressives rank and file could see how they have
been deceived and manipulated, and the greens and the
Naderite and organized labor -- all bought and paid for
to be covert instruments of ruling wealth -- then we might
get somewhere.
That's why I joined Zepp's group -- but then I saw that
I could not break through -- I could not be other than
"anti-Semitic fascist" -- used just as Hannity and
Rush Limbaugh use "liberal"
fact is I am a liberal and progressives do not really
like liberals -- they are a substitute for true liberalism --
true liberalism would want the whole truth out about
9-11 and it would want totalitarian tools of the rich
like Michael Moore and Hillary CLinton and Kerry
exposed -- before we pay the price of buying something
we are being lied about by the salesmen etc.
Anyway I have unsubscribed the weasle list --
In hope of a future solidarity attained without mass bloodshed
and a world fit for children and everybody else to realize the
possibilities now suppressed and locked away inside their skin.
Sincerely
"Grot"
p.s. you asked for something I notice -- here goes:
a jet liner is crashed into a government's military headquarters
the crash is used to build the secret agencies of government,
to increase the dictatorial powers of government over critics
and political opponents,
to ge t the news media and entertainment propagandizing
machinery to sup****t the government's call for war
but someone notices from a photo of the crash into the
military headquarters that the hole made in the wall is
wrong, specifically there are holes off to one side
that do not belong there, there was fire in places
where there was not crash, and most im****tant,
there is no penetration to the right of the hole
where the nose hit showing that there ever was
a starboard engine (and we know the engine
didn't get ripped off the wing before it hit the
wall, because the lawn is pristine clean)
but not only that -- there is was a video security
camera that was released by the military headquarters
showing the attack -- except that the picture frames
released only show the plane when it is mostly
hidden behind an obstruction in the foreground and
only the tail fin is shown sticking up behind the
obstruction -- however citizens who look closely
at the pictures, who enlarge them and show them
consequitively in "animated" sequence -- discover
that the obstruction was not big enough to have
covered the entire fuselage of jetliner that is said
to have crashed -- that if that tail fin is the tail fin
of the jetliner in question, a jet line with a given
ratio of tail fin height to fuselage length, then the
cockpit end of the fuselage should be visible
sticking out behind the obstruction on the opposite
side of the obstruction from where the tail fin is
sticking up and in the direction of flight. The plane is
too short to be the airliner that is said to have crashed.
But this can be verified by comparing the length
of fuselage that can be hidden by the obstruction given
the distance as judged by the tail fin image size, comparing
that maximum possible length of fuselage with the
height of the building that was hit. The length of plane that is
hidden by the obstruction, citizens observe, is less than
the height of the building (71 ft.), whereas the type of
jetliner that is said by the governemnt to have crashed
into the building is a plane for than twice as long as
the building is tall (jetliner 155 ft. long) -- which sup****ts
the conclusion made from reasoning from just the
tailfin image size and length of fusleage blocked from
sight by the obstruction.
But this gets even more strange.
Also in the video there is a thick white trail of smoke
following the jet that leads right up to just below the
tail fin -- and this smoke is too thick to be off-wing
turbulence condensation trail (contrail) but it does
match up exactly with smoke emitted when an
short jet fighter is firing an air to ground missile
(one jet fighter that could do this kind of attack
is about 45 ft long.)
And going with the discovery, by citizens, of the
missile smoke trail, is, in the second frame of the
video camera, a giant white hot explosion -- a
white flash cloud that is almost twice as high
as the building and that lights up the landscape --
an explosion consistent with a missile warhead
explosion, but not with an aluminum plane and
orange-red burning jet fuel kerosene hitting a
concrete office building.
Some citizens therefore conclude that the
extra hole off to the right of the crash hole
on the wall of the military headquarters
building was penetrated by a missile
that was fired.
Also, citizens note that something brought down
a 70 ft. stretch of the outer wall of the first floor,
and that there are effects of a blast, rather than
of a crash, with pillars blown away, their steal
reinforcement bars remaining, where no jetliner
should have touched -- indicating to the citizens
that a missile (probalby there were two missiles)
went ahead of the cra****ng jet fighter to soften
the wall so that the fighter could enter the building
without leaving telltale "et fighter debris outside
the building where it could be seen and photographed.
Also citizens, looking at the lampposts that were
knocked down, not that the southwestmost lamppost
that was downed was not in line, not on the path,
that witnesses of the jetliners approach give for the
jetliner -- they say it come over a hotel and a naval
building, over a piece of the national cemetery
and over a gas station on its where to the crash
location -- which line of approach entirely misses
the spot where the southwest-most lamppost was
hit. This indicates that the big ****ny slow airliner
that everyone was watching (after hearing about
airliners that had just crashed in another city),
was not the short jet that fired the missile ahead
of its own crash and that knocked down that
lamppost southwest of the crash.
Citizens also noted that the lamppost and the
entry hole in the wall also line up with an exit
hole deeper into the military building -- and that
this straight line of physical damage from lamppost
to entry hole to the exit hole in the last wall penetrated
forms a straight line at an angle of about 50 or 55 degrees
from the wall for the approach of the killer jet from
the southwest. And this line of phyiscal evidence is
not in line with what the witnesses re****t, i.e., the
lamppost-hole-hole line is further south and at
a different angle than the line of witness
locatings of the jetliner (i.e., over hotel, over naval building,
over cemetery road, over gas station) -- thus two converging
lines that form a "V" , converging on the crash point.
And citizens finally note that the Boeing was approaching
from over the roofs of five story buildings higher on a hill,
that it was seen over the five story naval building. And a
taxi driver, whose taxi wind****ld was hit band broken by
the southwest pole that hit -- and is not sure that the
jetliner hit the building himself -- states that when he glanced
at the jetliner it appeared to him that it could have flown
over the building if it wanted to.(that in the second or so
after his taxi was hit by the pole and before the crash
which he did not see).
Where there citizens who saw two planes approaching
the Pentagon and one veer away? Yes.
Did someone hear a jet fighter? Yes.
Did air traffic controllers see a plane behaving more
like a military jet? Yes.
Did someone, a military man, hear a missile's distinctive sound?
Yes.
Where the media talking about a second plane being seen
by some witnesses during the first hour after the crash. Yes.
Did someone, military, smell burning chordite (high-explsovies smell)>
Yes.
Was there a lot of jetliner debris for all to see and photograph?
No.
Was one piece clearly a piece of skin of the kind of jetliner in question
photographed on the lawn after the crash?
Yes. But this solitary piece of physical evidence indicating a jetliner
could only have come from the starboard side (as indicated by the
letter fragment on the piece, the bare aluminum that follows the
letter, and the location of the lines of rivet holes) -- it matches up
as a piece from the starboard side (the right side) the side that
would have faced south as a plane was appraoching the wall that
was hit -- BUT THE PIECE WAS FOUND AND PHOTOGRAPHED
ON THE GRASS OVER A HUNDRED FEET SOUTH OF THE
CRASH, ON GRASS THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN ON THE
****T SIDE OF THE PLANE THAT CRASHED -- indicating
that the one piece of debris linking to the type of jetliner that
the government says crashed, was actually planted on that
grass. -- ANd sure enought, when citizens wrote to the
photographer, he indicated that he arrived 10 minutes after
the crash (from the naval building) and that the lawn had
already been combed by government agents who were
picking up pieces of material (and we must assume,
at least in once case, putting one piece down on
the lawn, but on the wrong side, not the side that
that particular piece had to have come from.
And of course there is the standdown of military defense.
There is the fact that the plane and missile took out
offices on the first floor, in what must have been a
surgical attack on people in the military headquarters
that the plotters of the attack did not like. And sure
enough, rescurers were not allowed to enter the building
and bring out survivors -- this was done by a Col.
who just happened to be there to do that -- he would
turn the people whe brought out over to resucers
at a certain line which the rescuers were not allowed
to cross. And even the secretary of defense, in charge
of all the military, after the crash, did not go to the
situation room, but went to "help with the rescue",
to help with this taking out of people to be rescued
to the rescuers waiting outside. And it was this same
Secretary of Defense, who prevented entry to look
for survivors afterwards, insisting, nor ordering, that
"one one could have survived in there" and that
no such search should take place.
But don't pay attention to me. I'm just a fascist
and a glory hound trying to steal attention from
those who have discovered the real story of
the attack -- that all the planes were holograms,
or that they were all armed with missiles on their
fuselages or with big humps on their underbellies --
and that all investigators should be taken as
equal and given equal weight -- including those
who know it was a plot by the "reptilians" etc. --
or the fat boy hired by the cor****ations to
do a do***entary saying that the real culprits
were from the next country that the government
wants to invade.
Warm regard and good-bye,
"Grot"
----- Original Message -----
From: gary addis
To: weasel@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tuesday, June 29, 2004 8:22 PM
Subject: Re: [weasel] It comes down to Hillary or Huey -- income tax to
fund
****k-base oligarchy or wealth tax to fund all middle-class liberal state
gary addis wrote:
Grot wrote:
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY), speaking at a Democratic party
fundraiser in San Francisco yesterday, was remarkably frank about the
Democrats' intentions to use socialist redistribution policies if the
party gains power after the November elections.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXxxxxx clipped XXXXXXXXXXXXXx
Grot, your input is appreciated, really. If you could remember to not
trash
all our core beliefs, as in the pentagon thing?
Lots of folks toss out conspiracy theories here--and that's fine, we'll
debate
the merits and sometime agree to disagree, and drop it at that. But
liberalism/socialism (i.e. attaining social justice for all) is our goal.
We've got to believe in something..in someone, or else, it's all hopeless
and we might as well all pull up our britches and go home. To accuse
Moore
of-- I'm unsure of exactly what Moore was being accused of, but it sure
seemed overboard to me. He is one of us till more than wild conjecture
proves otherwise. As for John Kerry... he's ours because we haven't a lot
of alternative here.
If Kerry is wicked and Moore is wicked and Clinton is wicked, who are we
left with?
Your last post accused everyone but Bush-- I think-- it was so wild in its
accusations,
they were hard to follow.
How about posting positive stuff...fuel our resolve with mention of all
the
ways we the working stiffs are being screwed, yes, please do. But,
please,
don't in the same breath attmept to
destroy all hope for a better tomorrow.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXxx
The Progressive does not, I observe, want to get away from
class distinction -- they do not want an all middle-class
nation -- they did not like Huey Long even when Huey
gave school books and roads and colleges to the poor --
Progressives want a proletariate that they can take care
of and farm and manage and regulate and lord over,
don't they -- isn't that what the "new class" talk was all
about.
Now I have not opened the letters on Michael Moore, because
I am afraid of what the reaction will be -- I want to talk
with the politically enlightened -- but I always expect to have
the fascist label slapped on me and then be shown the door.
Seeking solidarity,
"Grot"
"Talk with" denotes a desire for a two-way conversation. You want to
proselytize.
You're convinced in your views, and intend to preach at us till we follow
your lead.
I don't for a moment believe your opinions can be influenced: they appear
to
be set
in reinforced concrete. Or am I reading you too harshly?
Rather than long, angry diatribes against Moore, perhaps if you toss out a
few
informative sentences explaining why you believe our one effective liberal
voice is
a bought and paid traitor to everything he claims to believe in. Why
would
you attack
Moore, I keep wondering. what is your agenda-- you clearly have one.
--
"I think contraception is disgusting-people using each other for
pleasure...
for those who say I can't impose my morality on others, I say watch me."
-Joseph Scheidler, executive director, Pro-Life Action League
|
