Ajarn Forum - Living and Teaching In Thailand - View Single Post

Larkinny · 3rd June 2008, 17:27

Swiss newspaper asks if Bush was behind 9/11

Quote:

Blick, a newspaper with a daily circulation of 275,000, has released an article asking many questions about the official version of the events of 9/11. They are referencing some work done by local professors at the University of Switzerland, Albert A. Stahel (63) and Daniele Ganser (34).

Stahel, an expert in strategy, commented, "something is wrong" and called the official line "incomplete". Gansers stance is much harder - believing that Bush and co. could be responsible "The more we explore, the more we doubt on Bush's version...Bush has lied so much already!"

The issue is still a taboo inside the media, but slowly more and more mainstream sources are asking questions of the official commission. Should the 9/11 truth movement get what they want and have a fresh public investigation into the attacks?

OK, so only a local rag, but newsworthy all the same.

Then we have this major Croatian news site:

Javno - World

Quote:

In 1997, the neo-conservatives William Kristol and Robert Kagan founded PNAC, with the aim of Reuters-.--.-getting the USA to stand on its feet and free itself of evil regimes in the beginning. The most dangerous of those regimes was Saddam Hussein.

They did not want to be in the shadows any longer, and on January 26, 1998 they sent a letter to Bill Clinton in which they sought the urgent invasion of Iraq in order to stop any attempts of attacks against the United States. Clinton ignored them, because of which they contacted all of the Republican members of congress. They did not ignore them.

[...]

However, regardless of how extreme the ideas of PNAC were, what provoked the most controversy was the 90 page document from September 2000, called “Rebuilding America’s Defences – Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century” in which PNAC described in detail, how the United States could progress.

Even though the entire document is very extreme, the most interesting part is where PNAC called for a new Pearl Harbour:

“Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.

[...]

Political analysts are comparing the document to Mein Kampf, because it was also ignored until war took place. However, everybody knows how the Nazi idea and Hitler ended. The problem is that people have obviously learned nothing, and they allow these people to lead the world.