<< Home
Previous Posts
Archives
Online Poker Tour The3Dpoker
Blogs I'm reading

Abused By Illusions

Saturday, March 05, 2005
THEY WOULDN'T... WOULD THEY?
An excellent article from Axisoflogic on how we the people are being hoodwinked by the current war profiteers and empire builders using the heglian dialectic. For too long you have allowed them to trigger the most primitive part of your brain, the reptilian part, into shutting down by uttering the words "conspiracy theory."

I want you to think back to the last trip that you took with friends or relatives. How well would that trip have went if you hadn't discussed with them where it was that you all were gonna meet for your planned trip? How about if everyone just took off in their respective autos on whatever day they chose? Those who argue "coincidence theory" are arguing this ludicrous line of reasoning.

A further way these same people attempt to shut down your brain is by arguing that large groups of people could not keep a secret long enough for any conspiracy to work. The government has a device that is rather ingenious for eliminating this problem. It is called "split knowledge." What this means is that knowledge of any opeartion is split between those that participate in any operation with no one knowing the operation in totality. Thus, the large group not being able to keep a secret argument doesn't hold water either.

C.I. Abramson

From AxisofLogic.com

Global Empire
THEY WOULDN'T... WOULD THEY?
By Lynn Stuter
Mar 4, 2005, 20:23




In the not too distant past, the American people learned that Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) knew Pearl Harbor (December 7, 1941) was coming before the day arrived. Yet, for years, we have listened to replays of FDR’s speech to the nation in which he voiced what appeared to be righteous indignation and horror for the events of Pearl Harbor. Those events were the spring board for America’s entrance into World War II. As the American people took up the cause of World War II; as fathers, brothers, sons and husbands went off to war; as the women took up the call of “Rosey the Riveter;” did they know that their president knew Pearl Harbor was coming and took no action to stop it? No, they didn’t.

What we see here is the Hegelian Dialectic at work: create the crisis to effect the wanted solution. Knowing what the Japanese had planned, FDR allowed it to happen to justify America’s entrance into World War II. The price was the loss of American lives justified by the stated goal. But what was the unstated goal?

For many Americans, the knowledge of what FDR did was their first inkling that things might not be too ethical in the halls of our government. For many, a long shadow was cast over the legitimacy of subsequent “crisis” that affected the lives of the American people, some of which were undoubtedly real. Others, even knowing what FDR did, justified his actions in the name of “national security.”

Recently, a document came to my attention called the “Northwoods Document.” In the normal course of events, I sought the authenticity of this document which led me to the George Washington University Website and a section entitled “National Security Archives.” There I found the Northwoods Document.

The Northwoods Document is dated March 13, 1962 and concerns what would become known as the Cuban Missile Crisis. The document is damning, as well as revealing, in its content. The cover memo states:

“The Joint Chiefs of Staff have considered the attached Memorandum for the Chief of Operations, Cuba Project, which responds to a request of that office for brief but precise description of pretexts which would provide justification for US military intervention in Cuba.”

The operant word here being “pretexts.”

The opening salvo of the “justifications” memo re-iterates the aforesaid and continues:

“Cognizance has been taken of a suggested course of action proposed** by the US Navy relating to generated instances in the Guantanamo area.”

The operant word here being “generated.” Our first inkling that a crisis was being “generated” or created to justify US military intervention in Cuba. On page three of the justifications memo, we read,

“The suggested courses of action appended to Enclosure A satisfactorily respond to the statement of the problem. However, these suggestions should be forwarded as a preliminary submission suitable for planning purposes, and together with similar inputs from other agencies, provide a basis for development of a single, integrated, time-phased plan to focus all efforts on the objective of justification for US military intervention in Cuba.”

Appendix to Enclosure A makes some interesting disclosures, such as:

“Such a plan would enable a logical build-up of incidents to be combined with other seemingly unrelated events to camouflage the ultimate objective and create the necessary impression of Cuban rashness and irresponsibility on a large scale, directed at other countries as well as the United States … The desired resultant from the execution of this plan would be to place the United States in the apparent position of suffering defensible grievances from a rash and irresponsible government of Cuba and to develop an international image of a Cuban threat to peace in the Western Hemisphere.”

What could be considered in the logical build-up of incidents? The document suggests such things as starting rumors; land friendly Cubans in uniform over the fence to stage attack on the base; start riots near the base main gate using friendly Cubans; blow up ammunition inside the base and start fires; burn aircraft on the air base; sabotage a ship in the harbor creating large fires; sink a ship near the harbor entrance, then conduct funerals for the mock-victims. All of this to happen at, or in the vicinity of, the Guantanamo Naval Air Station, an American held facility located in Cuba. The document even goes into how to fake the downing of a US commercial airplane:

“The destination would be chosen only to cause the flight plan route to cross Cuba. The passengers would be a group of college students off on a holiday or any grouping of persons with a common interest to support chartering a non-scheduled flight.

a. An aircraft at Eglin AFB would be painted and numbered as an exact duplicate for a civil registered aircraft belonging to a CIA proprietary organization in the Miami area. At a designated time the duplicate would be substituted for the actual civil aircraft and would be loaded with the selected passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases. The actual registered aircraft would be converted to a drone.


b. Take off times of the drone aircraft and the actual aircraft will be scheduled to allow a rendezvous south of Florida. From the rendezvous point the passenger-carrying aircraft will descend to minimum altitude and go directly into an auxiliary field at Eglin AFB where arrangements will have been made to evacuate the passengers and return the aircraft to its original status. The drone aircraft meanwhile will continue to fly the filed flight plan. When over Cuba the drone will being (begin) transmitting on the international distress frequency a ‘May Day’ message stating he is under attack by Cuban MIG aircraft. The transmission will be interrupted by destruction of the aircraft which will be triggered by radio signal. This will allow ICAO radio stations in the Western Hemisphere to tell the US what has happened to the aircraft instead of the US trying to ‘sell’ the incident.”
Does this scenario sound familiar? Is what the public was told about the downing of Flight 800 really true? What about the commercial flights supposedly involved in September 11, 2001? Were these planes really hi-jacked? Were those really commercial airplanes that hit the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon?

Read the rest of this story at Axisoflogic.com

Post a Comment