MSNBC 9/11 Polls, get in there and vote ;)

[ISAIAH]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3080261/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14727720/

[charlesa6]

Originally Posted by ISAIAH

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3080261/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14727720/

Thanks. we do.

[ISAIAH]

Its amazing that both are over 50% in favor of the gov having some hand in it. Gota love it.

[charlesa6]

Didn’t that break your heart?

[rottweiler]

That is amazing. Maybe their is hope for the sheeple after all.

[Freedomless]

This is very interesting.

http://www.fourwinds10.com/NewsServe...rticleID=10744

[ISAIAH]

Holly Cow, almost 60% now, and almost 100,000 votes in between the 2.

I hope they take these and run some good headlines about them.

[charlesa6]

I hope they do too.

[BOBT12]

Originally Posted by Freedomless

This is very interesting.

http://www.fourwinds10.com/NewsServe...rticleID=10744

Shouldn't we call it what it is, blood money!

You’ve got to be lucky to make $4 Billion killing on a 6-month investment of $124 Million

Larry Silverstein is the New York property tycoon who purchased the entire WTC complex just 6 months prior to the 9/11 attacks. That was the first time in its 33-year history the complex had EVER changed ownership.

Mr. Silverstein’s first order of business as the new owner was to change the company responsible for the security of the complex. The new security company he hired was Securacom (now Stratasec). George W. Bush's brother, Marvin Bush, was on its board of directors, and Marvin’s cousin, Wirt Walker III, was its CEO. According to public records, not only did Securacom provide electronic security for the World Trade Center, it also covered Dulles International Airport and United Airlines — two key players in the 9/11 attacks.

The company was backed by an investment firm, the Kuwait-American Corp., also linked for many years to the Bush family. KuwAm has been linked to the Bush family financially since the Gulf War. One of its principals and a member of the Kuwaiti royal family, Mishal Yousef Saud al Sabah, served on the board of Stratesec.

Now, consider: The members of a small cabal owned the WTC complex, controlled its electronic security, and also controlled the security not only for one of the airlines whose aircraft were hijacked on 9/11, but the airport from which they originated.

Another little “coincidence” -- Mr. Silversten, who made a down-payment of $124 million on this $3.2 billion complex, promptly insured it for $7 Billion. Not only that, he covered the complex against “terrorist attacks”.

Emphasis added.

Mr. Silversten openly admits to "pulling" (demolishing) World Trade Center (WTC) building 7. Pre-established explosives had to be used to pull the 47 floor, steel reinforced, building.

All of this opened the door to the War on Terror as put forth by the Project for a New American Century (PNAC). What do we have to show for our national gullibility?

62,006 - the number killed in the 'war on terror'

By David Randall and Emily Gosden

Published: 10 September 2006

The "war on terror" - and by terrorists - has directly killed a minimum of 62,006 people, created 4.5 million refugees and cost the US more than the sum needed to pay off the debts of every poor nation on earth.

If estimates of other, unquantified, deaths - of insurgents, the Iraq military during the 2003 invasion, those not recorded individually by Western media, and those dying from wounds - are included, then the toll could reach as high as 180,000.

The extraordinary scale of the conflict's impact, claiming lives from New York to Bali and London to Lahore, and the extent of the death tolls in Iraq and Afghanistan, has emerged from an Independent on Sunday survey to mark the fifth anniversary of 11 September. It used new, unpublished data supplied by academics and organisations such as Iraq Body Count and Professor Marc Herold of the University of New Hampshire, plus estimates given by other official studies.

The result is the first attempt to gauge the full cost in blood and money of the worldwide atrocities and military conflicts that began in September 2001. As of yesterday, the numbers of lives confirmed lost are: 4,541 to 5,308 civilians and 385 military in Afghanistan; 50,100 civilians and 2,899 military in Iraq; and 4,081 in acts of terrorism in the rest of the world.

The new figure on civilian deaths from Iraq Body Count, a group of British and US academics, is especially telling. Just two and a half years ago, its estimate of the number of civilian dead in Iraq passed 10,000. Today, it says, that figure has gone beyond the 50,000 mark - a huge leap largely attributable to terrorist acts and the breakdown of civil authority.

Iraq Body Count's careful methodology - of recording a death only when it appears in two independent media reports - almost certainly produces a substantial underestimate. Even the Iraqi Health Ministry reports a slightly higher figure, and President Bush's much-quoted figure of 30,000 civilian dead dates from December 2005, when it tallied with the then IBC figure. Insurgent deaths are not included in the IBC figures, and neither are those of Iraqi police when engaged in combat-style operations.

Estimates of the former are, together with the number of Iraqi military killed in the battle phase of the Iraq occupation, the biggest unknown of the conflict. One US news report guessed the insurgent dead in Iraq at 36,000 since 2003, while the number of Iraqi military killed during the invasion phase remains unknown and unknowable.

Neither category is included in our figure of 62,006 confirmed directly killed. Nor does it include any figures for people later dying from wounds received, or the increased mortality owing to lack of health care. Estimates for one or the other ranging up to 130,000 have been produced, but are based on little more than educated (and uneducated) guesswork or, as with the controversial Lancet estimate of 98,000 deaths due to extra mortality, by amplifying a survey of 988 households into a nation-wide conclusion.

What is certain is the wretched state of health care in Iraq. In March 2006 the campaign group Medact reported that 18,000 physicians have left since 2003; an estimated 250 of those that remained have been kidnapped and, in 2005 alone, 65 killed. Medact also said that "easily treatable conditions such as diarrhoea and respiratory illness caused 70 per cent of all child deaths", and that "of the 180 health clinics the US hoped to build by the end of 2005, only four have been completed and none has been opened". In May, a survey by the Iraq government and Unicef reported that a quarter of all Iraqi children suffer from malnutrition.

In Afghanistan, the most reliable recorder of civilian deaths is Professor Marc Herold, whose latest figures range from 4,541 to 5,308. He does not include those who die subsequently from their injuries or in refugee camps.These "indirect" deaths have been put at anything from 8,000 to 20,000. More accurate are estimates of refugee numbers. In July, the US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants said there were 2.2 million Afghans who had fled abroad and at least 153,200 displaced internally. For Iraq, there were 888,700 external refugees, and 1.3 million people displaced inside the country. An estimated 40 per cent of the Iraqi middle class have left Iraq.

Beyond the blood price, there is a dollar and sterling cost. In July it was reported that the US Congress had approved $437bn (£254bn) for costs related to the "war on terror". This, a sum greater than those spent on the Korean and Vietnam wars, compares to the $375bn that Make Poverty History says is needed to clear the debts of the world's poorest nations. The British Government has spent £4.5bn on Iraq and Afghanistan.

IRAQ: Orphaned and badly burned at 12

The image of a despairing 12-year-old orphan lying on a filthy Iraqi hospital bed, his arms burnt off above the elbow, symbolised the "collateral damage" of the second Gulf war. Ali Abbas had 60 per cent burns after an American bombing raid on the Baghdad suburbs hit his home and killed 15 of his relatives, including his parents and his brother.

[...]JORDAN: Shot by a lone extremist

Christopher Stokes was with a tour group visiting the Roman amphitheatre in Jordan's capital, Amman, when he was shot by a lone extremist last week. The 30-year-old had given up his accountancy job to tour the Middle East. "Christopher lived his dreams," his father Rod, 59, said. "He travelled because he wanted to meet people."

SPAIN: Bombed on way to work

Maria Moyano did not drive to work on the morning of the Madrid bombings in March 2004; she was awaiting delivery of her new car. The 30-year-old economics student had just returned from studying in America and was planning a July wedding. Her body was so badly mutilated in the blast that it took several days to identify her.

USA: Passenger on United 93

Deora Bodley was a first-year student at a Catholic university in California. The 20-year old San Diegan was the youngest of 44 passengers killed when United Airlines Flight 93 crashed into a Pennsylvania field on 11 September 2001. She was supposed to take the flight an hour later, but wanted to get home sooner to her family and boyfriend.

AFGHANISTAN: Killed at a checkpoint

Nasrat Ali Hassan was shot as he passed a Canadian military checkpoint outside Kandahar in March. The 45-year-old father of six was a passenger in a rickshaw taxi, and was allegedly shot four times. The price of compensating his family should start with Canadian citizenship, according to the victim's eldest brother.

[...]The "war on terror" - and by terrorists - has directly killed a minimum of 62,006 people, created 4.5 million refugees and cost the US more than the sum needed to pay off the debts of every poor nation on earth.

If estimates of other, unquantified, deaths - of insurgents, the Iraq military during the 2003 invasion, those not recorded individually by Western media, and those dying from wounds - are included, then the toll could reach as high as 180,000.

The extraordinary scale of the conflict's impact, claiming lives from New York to Bali and London to Lahore, and the extent of the death tolls in Iraq and Afghanistan, has emerged from an Independent on Sunday survey to mark the fifth anniversary of 11 September.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/...cle1433404.ece

[BOBT12]

The Bush-Cheney regime came to power with the plans drawn to attack the remaining independent countries in the Middle East and with neoconservatives in office to implement the plans. However, an excuse was required. Neoconservatives had called for “a new Pearl Harbor,” and 9/11 provided the propaganda event needed in order to stampede the public and Congress into war. Neoconservative Philip Zelikow was put in charge of the 9/11 Commission Report to make certain no uncomfortable facts emerged.

The neoconservatives have had enormous help from the corporate media, from Christian evangelicals, particularly from the “Rapture Evangelicals,” from flag-waving superpatriots, and from the military- industrial complex whose profits have prospered. But the fact remains that the dozen men named in the second paragraph above were able to overthrow the US Constitution and launch military aggression under the guise of a preventive/preemptive “war against terrorism.”

When the American people caught on that the “war on terror” was a cloak for wars of aggression, they put Democrats in control of Congress in order to apply a brake to the regime’s warmongering. However, the Democrats have proven to be impotent to stop the neoconservative drive to wider war and, perhaps, world conflagration.

We are witnessing the triumph of a dozen evil men over American democracy and a free press.

For more information

The trouble with thinking 9/11 was an inside job staged by George W. Bush & Co. is that it defies belief any U.S. president might be capable of such an iniquitous crime against his own people.

Yet, subsequent Bush actions, such as lying the nation into war against Iraq, makes one wonder if the man didn't create the 9/11 massacres to justify his attacks on Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran.

After all, his record reveals him to be a serial liar, warmonger, tyrant, torturer, and usurper of his peoples' civil liberties. Just off the top, here are some illegal GWB actions that betray what he is really about.

# Bush lied the U.S. into what former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan called an “illegal” war on Iraq . This conflict has killed 650,000 civilians, wounded over a million more, drove nearly 2-million from their country, and turned life into a living hell for the rest. The death toll there is already equal to about 240 WTC massacres, yet Bush persists in waging the war.

# Bush okayed $1.5-trillion for new weapons' research including grisly weapons that would thrill mad scientists, such as sound waves that crush a victim's internal organs. Another gem is "rods from god" to hurl tungsten poles down from Earth orbit down upon its victims at 7,200 miles an hour, striking with the atomic fury. He is illegally militarizing space. These are not the dreams of a humanist.

# Bush has allowed illegal radioactive ammunition fired in Afghanistan and Iraq that poison civilian populations and U.S. troops, as well as cluster bombs. Does this evince concern for human life?

# Bush has made himself master of the greatest spy apparatus the world has ever known at a cost to taxpayers of $50-billion annually. He authorized NSA to spy illegally on Americans, allegedly to catch terrorists. If this was the true reason, why did he also eavesdrop on UN officials?

# Bush authorized CIA agents to go to foreign countries to kidnap "suspects" and dump them in distant prisons to be tortured with no warrants signed to seize them, no charges brought against them, and no lawyers to defend them. In his secret prisons there may be many thousands held illegally, and tortured, while all the time he lies to the world "we don't torture." Is this a man with empathy for others?

BUSH RECORD OF SUBSEQUENT CRIMES POINTS TO POSSIBLE ROLE IN 9/11 WTC, PENTAGON STRIKES

In reality, this story boils down to two facets and the BBC has not provided an adequate answer to either of them;

a) What was the source of the information that led the BBC to report that Building 7 had collapsed before it did? In his second response, head of BBC World Richard Porter cites CNN, local news media and unnamed firefighters who were interviewed after the fact, but still cannot provide an individual or authority by name.

Porter attempts to create a scenario whereby the collapse of Building 7 was easily anticipated, and this is why news organizations jumped the gun to report its demise. In reality, WTC 7 stood over 300 yards away from the twin towers and was partly shielded by WTC 6 which did not collapse yet was completely gutted by raging fires and debris damage, whereas WTC 7 had limited fires. Building 7 was structurally reinforced in 1989 giving it, "Enough redundancy to allow entire portions of floors to be removed without affecting the building's structural integrity," according to the New York Times .

[...]

b) How can we trust the BBC or the establishment media in general to provide accurate information about any major event when all they do is repeat what is told to them and relay it as gospel with no independent verification whatsoever, to the point where we are told a building has collapsed by a reporter while it mockingly stands behind her head?

Building 7 becomes the Achilles heel of the official conspiracy theory

This seems to reveal where we are as a nation.