911 and 77 (21)
If you already accept that 9/11 was an Inside Job then you also must surely know that the idea of the terrorists is a fiction and the war on terror is equally an invention. Therefore you also know that the invasion and military atrocities in Afghanistan and Iraq are huge unjustified war crimes and you probably have figured out the real intention behind them especially as it appears not to be secret when it was all laid out. I guess the term PNAC is what sums it neatly up. On top of that you may have your suspicions about other things.
But the New Yourk events of that day of the 9/11 atrocities can only reveal part of the picture and at best only hint at the more important larger picture.
So please consider that is was indeed a missile strike upon the Pentagon and not a plane because it is really only with this appreciation that you can grasp that it was a coup d'etat that actually took place in the USA that day.
Once you realize that it was a missile then you pretty well have to conclude that it was a coup d'etat and only then does this new aggressive way the the US government is behaving make complete sense because you then grasp that the real American government is a military one and the apparent leaders and heads of government are either part of it or a front group that hides it from view.
What of the president? Do you reallly think it makes any difference the name of the president any more? The president was probably given an ultimatum some days prior to the missile attack amounting to "Cooperate or face the consequences". If he had cooperated at the outset then why bother with a missile strike at all? Therefore, I conclude, that he did not cooperate, initially, but after the attack you have to ask yourself what his choices were. To make an immediate media announcement of the truth and to attempt to regain and restore government as a civilian, not military, organisaton and order a sweeping scale of arrests of top people or to acquiesce. Who would he instruct to make the arrests? The FBI? The CIA? Are they part of it, the coup d'etat, too? Clearly he didn't do that, for whatever reasons. The situation can only be that he gave in to the group that attacked the Pentagon and is now in effect fronting for them.
Personally, I don't see what choice he really had. He must have refused to meet their demands or at least the ultimatum that resulted in the attack, but afterwards, what, realistically, could he have done?
This is always the danger in the people allowing the government to increase the power of the police, the military, the secret services and other organisations that are meant to be subservient to the people. At some point they take over control or at least that is what the risk always is. And now it has happened.
The US government ever since 9/11 has really been a military government and, naturally, it has a military agenda. Military governments are one thing but this one is hidden behind a screen that gives the impression of authentic civilian government.
This explains why there is an increasing set of moves to disempower the people, to change laws to do that and to further legitimize and empower the military objectives, why the police are being militarized, why new organisations such as "Homeland Security" are invented. It is the formation of a new Nazi era.
So what is the point of this article? It is to just to try and encourage 9/11 Truthers who do not believe in the missile hypothesis to take a fresh look at it.
But isn't it enough to see through the New York parts of it all? No it isn't because that is just a layer that obfuscates the greater reality. The military involvement is hardly hinted at even with the totality of the New York aspects of 9/11 - sure there is some strong evidence of military collusion but collusion is about as far as that evidence takes us.
Thus lets imagine that those 9/11 Truthers who want an investigation were to finally, let's say in another few years, get some kind of investigation, well, what kind of investigation do you suppose it will be other than a stage show of one with no intention of revealing the truth and certainly every intention of concealing the more important truth. It would be an ineffective investigative body and a sham of an outcome. And what then, after that? More pleas for an investigation?
I do not mean to demean those who seek an investigation - it is certainly something worthy to aim for, but concurrently with such attempts isn't it a good idea to work out the greater picture of what is going on now?
The missile strike is the only way to get at that greater truth both of what happened on 9/11 and what has been happening in the years since then.
I don't have answers other than to be aware of what the truth is and to at least share that awareness with others to some extent but beyond that, I haven't got much of a clue, in fact I am even cautious when it comes to sharing the information. In principle I believe it is best to shout it loud but in practice, knowing how people are being "silenced" I am more inclined to advise caution and even secrecy and not putting yourself at risk of false arrest, false imprisonment and much much worse.
My own intention is simply to write, as I do, but not to campaign, not to speak before audiences. That is not just about wanting to try and safeguard my health and life but it is my preferred way in any case. It is the same with all the things I write about. My philosophy is that if people want to know then they can read what I have to say but they can also find a huge amount of information on the internet too, just as I did, which is more than sufficient to cause any reasonable minded person who actually does want to know what is really going on to find out for themselves.
In addition, personally, I do not advocate civil unrest, rioting and the like. When it comes to any kind of action my own preference is for peaceful non cooperation. But I have no idea if that is the right way or not. I simply explain my own view and attitude so that there is no misunderstanding about my own role in all of this. Make yourself more aware and decide for yourself what it is best to do about any of it. The problem has arisen in the first place because the people have not forced government to restrict the power of it's various agencies and thus they have, as is always the tendency, become far too powerful and, finally, the situation has totally flipped. The time for action by the people has long passed and their failure to do so has resulted in the nightmare situation that we now have. That is not to say that a huge bloodbath on the streets will not happen - I think it probably will - but that I don't see how it can achieve much. I do not see the situation as hopeless but I do not have the answers other than in the most general sense and that is simply to make your own self more aware of what is actually quite obvious really. It isn't difficult to figure any of it out at all but what is hard is to understand why so many people just can't or won't see it. I should really be one of those people who are at the back of the queue still oblvious to the fact of 9/11 being and Inside Job. It never interested me, even seeing the suspicious things about the collapsing towers (1, 2 and 7 particularly) didn't prompt me to do my own research. I carried on assuming that the 9/11 story was the official version and never gave it any thought until January 2007 when I rapidly learnt the truth. Also, I don't really want to be writing about it at all - so we have now a Nazi era upon us yet again, so what's new, in a sense, is my attitude to it all. Military governments exist in many other countries too, so what? I think, for me, it is just about helping anyone who is actually interested in finding out the truth, to actually do that. This IS part of an important truth. But I am no campaigner and my other interests as expressed on this web site (SaneThinking.com) are just as important if not more important because tyranny is probably always going to be with us and the mass of people are always going to be blind to it. For me it is enough to state and explain the situation as I see it and not to enter into debate or discussion (I am thinking of the usual 'forum' discussion type of discussion and the 'real world' equivalent too where the focus and intention is hardly to do with the main truth but about a kind of juxtapositioning of various individuals - completely of no interest to me whatsoever. But isn't it enough to simply do that? I think it is.
By Paul E. Coughlin
SaneThinking.com
6 May 2007
![[Valid RSS]](valid-rss.png "Validate my RSS feed")
