A Personal Journey to Reality

[Carsten Wiethoff]

They should make a twitter poll in the US and ask the people, if they feel that they are living in a state of emergency, like in a disaster or other grave danger.
If they say no, as most likely the majority will do, tell them that the president and congress think so, or at least say so.

Ask them, just as an assurance, to twitter their congressperson that everything is ok at their place.
Hashtag: #NOEMERGENCYHERE



Really, do that.

I just twittered
#NOEMERGENCYHERE
#COG

to whoever follows me. I can be followed @phaeton_666.

[David Guyatt]

The below article by Pepe Escobar is worth reading imo.

Going Theory: Cave-Dweller in Afghanistan, 19 Friends Mastermind Devastating Attack on US

[FONT=&amp]After years of reporting on the Global War on Terror, many questions behind the US attacks remain unresolved

Pepe Escobar 21 hours ago | 2720 words 3,313 45


Afghanistan was bombed and invaded because of 9/11. I was there from the start, even before 9/11. On August 20, 2001, I interviewed commander Ahmad Shah Massoud, the "Lion of the Panjshir," who told me about an "unholy alliance" of the Taliban, al-Qaeda and the ISI (Pakistani intel).
Back in Peshawar, I learned that something really big was coming: my article was published by Asia Times on August 30. Commander Massoud was killed on September 9: I received a terse email from a Panjshir source, only stating, "the commander has been shot." Two days later, 9/11 happened.


And yet, the day before, none other than Osama bin Laden, in person, was in a Pakistani hospital in Rawalpindi, receiving treatment, as CBS reported. Bin Laden was proclaimed the perpetrator already at 11am on 9/11 with no investigation whatsoever. It should have been not exactly hard to locate him in Pakistan and "bring him to justice."
In December 2001 I was in Tora Bora tracking bin Laden under B-52 bombers and side by side with Pashtun mujahideen. Later, in 2011, I would revisit the day bin Laden vanished forever.

[FONT=&amp]Support Russia Insider - Go Ad-Free!

One year after 9/11, I was back in Afghanistan for an in-depth investigation of the killing of Massoud. By then it was possible to establish a Saudi connection: the letter of introduction for Massoud's killers, who posed as journalists, was facilitated by commander Sayyaf, a Saudi asset.

Saudi-born alleged terror mastermind Osama bin Laden is seen in a video taken at a secret site in Afghanistan. This was aired by Al-Jazeera on Oct. 7, 2001, the day the US launched bombing of terrorist camps, airbases and air defense installations in its campaign against the Taliban for sheltering bin Laden. Photo: AFP
For three years my life revolved around the Global War on Terror; most of the time I lived literally on the road, in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, the Persian Gulf and Brussels. At the start of Shock and Awe' on Iraq, in March 2003, Asia Times published my in-depth investigation of which neo-cons concocted the war on Iraq.
In 2004, roving across the US, I re-traced the Taliban's trip to Texas, and how a top priority, since the Clinton years all the way to the neo-cons, was about what I had baptized as "Pipelineistan" in this case how to build the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) gas pipeline, bypassing Iran and Russia, and extending US control of Central and South Asia.

[FONT=&amp]Support Russia Insider - Go Ad-Free![/FONT]

Later on, I delved into the hard questions the 9/11 Commission never asked, and how Bush's 2004 reelection campaign was totally conditioned by and dependent on 9/11.
Michael Ruppert, a CIA whistleblower, who may or may not have committed suicide in 2014, was a top 9/11 analyst. We exchanged a lot of information, and always emphasized the same points: Afghanistan was all about (existent) heroin and (non-existent) pipelines.
In 2011, the late, great Bob Parry would debunk more Afghanistan lies. And in 2017, I would detail a top reason why the US will never leave Afghanistan: the heroin rat line.
Now, President Trump may have identified a possible Afghan deal which the Taliban, who control two-thirds of the country, are bound to refuse, as it allows withdrawal of only 5,000 out of 13,000 US troops. Moreover, the US Deep State' is absolutely against any deal, as well as India and the rickety government in Kabul.
But Pakistan and China are in favor, especially because Beijing plans to incorporate Kabul into the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor and have Afghanistan admitted as a member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, thus attaching the Hindu Kush and the Khyber Pass to the ongoing Eurasia integration process.
Praying for a Pearl

[FONT=&amp]Support Russia Insider - Go Ad-Free![/FONT]

Eighteen years after the game-changing fact, we all remain hostages of 9/11. US neocons, gathered at the Project for the New American Century, had been praying for a "Pearl Harbor" to reorient US foreign policy since 1997. Their prayers were answered beyond their wildest dreams.
Already in The Grand Chessboard, also published in 1997, former National Security Adviser and Trilateral Commission co-founder Zbigniew Brzezinski, nominally not a neocon, had pointed out that the American public "supported America's engagement in World War II largely because of the shock effect of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor."
So, Brzezinski added, America "may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstance of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat."
As an attack on the homeland, 9/11 generated the Global War on Terror, launched at 11pm on the same day, initially christened "The Long War" by the Pentagon, later sanitized as Overseas Contingency Operations by the Obama administration. This cost trillions of dollars, killed over half a million people and branched out into illegal wars against seven Muslim nations all justified on "humanitarian grounds" and allegedly supported by the "international community."
Year after year, 9/11 is essentially a You Have The Right to Accept Only The Official Version ritual ceremony, even as widespread evidence suggests the US government knew 9/11 would happen and did not stop it.

[FONT=&amp]Support Russia Insider - Go Ad-Free![/FONT]

Three days after 9/11, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung reported that in June 2001, German intelligence warned the CIA that Middle East terrorists were "planning to hijack commercial aircraft to use as weapons to attack important symbols of American and Israeli culture."
In August 2001, President Putin ordered Russian intel to tell the US government "in the strongest possible terms" of imminent attacks on airports and government buildings, MSNBC revealed in an interview with Putin that was broadcast on September 15 that year.
No US government agency has released any information on who used foreknowledge of 9/11 in the financial markets. The US Congress did not even raise the issue. In Germany, investigative financial journalist Lars Schall has been working for years on a massive study detailing to a great extent insider trading before 9/11.
Mr Mueller, I presume

Robert Mueller was the Director of the FBI from 2001 to 2003. He was appointed by President Bush only one week before 9/11. Three days after 9/11, Mueller said, "there were no warning signs that I'm aware of" pointing to the possibility of airplanes crashing into buildings.
In fact FBI agents repeatedly accused HQ of blocking myriad investigations before 9/11 that could have prevented it.
In a devastating book, The FBI Accomplice of 9/11 (Documents), written in French and recently translated into English, Patrick Pasin painstakingly tracks all warnings on record: not only to the FBI, directly, but also including the by now notorious "August 6 memo," which referred to planned attacks involving multiple airplane hijackings. Then National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice famously dismissed the memo as "very vague," "very non-specific" and "nothing really new here."
Pasin meticulously aims to prove that the FBI knew all there was to know about indications toward the possibility of a 9/11. But then the bureau silenced them; buried them; made them disappear; fell into a prolonged comma; and, in quite serious instances, may have even forged false evidence, as in arguably fabricating a list of Muslim hijackers, complete with the finding of indestructible passports, and forging impossible phone calls placed at 30,000 feet.
Trump knows buildings

Discrediting the official, immutable 9/11 narrative remains the ultimate taboo. Hundreds of architects and engineers engaged in meticulous technical debunking of all aspects of 9/11's official story are summarily dismissed as "conspiracy theorists."
In the afternoon of 9/11, Donald Trump the real estate developer (not yet President of the United States) was interviewed by phone by Channel 9 in New York.
Fasten your seat belts, because this is incandescent. The serial money quotes start rolling at 5:20:

[FONT=&amp]Support Russia Insider - Go Ad-Free![/FONT]

Channel 9: "There is a great deal of questions about whether or not the damage and the ultimate destruction of the buildings was caused by the airplanes, by architectural defect or possibly by bombs, or after-shocks. Do you have any thoughts on that?"
Donald Trump: "It wasn't architectural defect. The World Trade Center was always known as a very, very strong building. Don't forget that it took a big bomb in the basement [in 1993]. Now the basement is the most vulnerable place, because that is your foundation and it withstood that. And I got to see that area about 3 or 4 days after it took place, because one of my structural engineers actually took me for a tour because he did the building. And I said I can't believe it'. The building was standing solid and half of the columns were blown out. This was an unbelievably powerful building if you know anything about structure. It was one of the first buildings that was built from the outside. The steel, the reason the WTC had such narrow windows is that in between all the windows you had steel on the outside of the building. That's why when I first looked at it you had big, heavy I-beams. When I first looked at it I couldn't believe it because there was a hole in the steel. And this was steel that was … you remember the width of the windows of the World Trade Center, folks, I think that you know, if you were ever up there, they were quite narrow and in between was this heavy steel. I said: How could a plane, even a 767 or 747 or whatever it might have been, how could it possibly go through the steel? I happen to think that they had not only a plane, but they had bombs that exploded almost simultaneously. [italics mine]. Because I just can't imagine anything being able to go through that wall. Most buildings are built with the steel on the inside around the elevator shafts. This one was built from the outside, which is the strongest structure you can have. And it was almost just like a can of soup."
Channel 9: "You know…we were looking at pictures all morning long of that plane coming into Building #2. And when you see that approach the far side, then all of a sudden within another millisecond the explosion pops out the other side."
Donald Trump: "Right. I just think that there was a plane with more than jet fuel." [italics mine]
Donald Trump may be extremely controversial and all things for all people. But one thing the former real estate developer and current President of the United States does know about is building construction.
Serious questions

In contrast, skepticism rooted in Greek and Latin tradition came up with arguably the best documentary on 9/11: Zero, an Italian production. Just as arguably the most stimulating book on 9/11 is also Italian: The Myth of September 11, by Roberto Quaglia, which offers a delicately nuanced narrative of 9/11 as a myth structured as a movie. The book became a huge hit in Eastern Europe.
Serious questions suggest quite plausible suspects to be investigated regarding 9/11, far more than 19 Arabs with box cutters. Ten years ago, in Asia Times, I asked 50 questions, some of them extremely detailed, about 9/11. After reader demand and suggestions, I added 20 more. None of these questions were convincingly addressed not to mention answered by the official narrative.
World public opinion is directed to believe that on the morning of 9/11 four airliners, presumably hijacked by 19 Arabs with box cutters, traveled undisturbed for two hours across the most controlled airspace on the planet, which is supervised by the most devastating military apparatus ever.
American Airlines Flight 11 deviated from its path at 8.13am and crashed into the first World Trade Center tower at 8.57am. Only at 8.46am did NORAD the North American Aerospace Defense Command order that two intercepting F-15s take off from Otis military base.
By a curious coincidence a Pentagon war game was in effect on the morning of 9/11 so air-controllers' radars may have registered only ghost signals' of nonexistent aircraft simulating an air attack. Well, it was much more complicated than that, as demonstrated by professional pilots.
Angel was next'

World public opinion is also directed to believe that a Boeing 757 with a wingspan of 38 meters managed to penetrate the Pentagon through a six-meter-wide hole and at the height of the first floor. A Boeing 757 with landing gear is 13 meters high. Airliners electronically refuse to crash so it's quite a feat to convince one to fly five to 10 meters above the ground, landing gear on, at a lightning speed of 800 kilometers an hour.
According to the official narrative, the Boeing 757 literally pulverized itself. Yet even after pulverization, it managed to perforate six walls of three rings of the Pentagon, leaving a two-meter wide hole in the last wall but only slightly damaging the second and third rings. The official narrative is that the hole was caused by the plane's nose still quite hard even after pulverization. Yet the rest of the plane a mass of 100 tons traveling at 800 kilometers an hour miraculously stopped at the first ring.
All that happened under the stewardship of one Hani Hanjour, who three weeks before had been judged by his flight instructors to be incapable of piloting a Cessna. Hanjour, nonetheless, managed to accomplish an ultra-fast spiral descent at 270 degrees, aligning at a maximum 10 meters above ground, minutely calibrating the trajectory, and keeping a cruise speed of roughly 800 kilometers an hour.

Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff Richard Myers, left, and US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld brief reporters at the Pentagon on Oct. 8, 2001 following the US bombing raids on Afghanistan in response to 9/11 attacks. Photo: AFP / Luke Frazza
At 9.37am, Hanjour hit precisely the Pentagon's budget analysts' office, where everyone was busy working on the mysterious disappearance of no less than $2.3 trillion that Defense Secretary Donald "Known Unknowns" Rumsfeld, in a press conference the day before, said could not be tracked. So, it's not only Boeings that get pulverized inside the Pentagon.
World public opinion is also directed to believe that Newtonian physics was suspended as a special bonus for WTC 1 and 2 on 9/11 (not to mention WTC 7, which was not even hit by any plane). The slower WTC tower took 10 seconds to fall 411 meters, starting from immobility. So it fell at 148 kilometers an hour. Considering the initial acceleration time, it was a free fall, not the least impeded by 47 massive, vertical steel beams that composed the tower's structural heart.
World public opinion is also directed to believe that United Airlines Flight 93 150 tons of aircraft with 45 people, 200 seats, luggage, a wingspan of 38 meters crashed in a field in Pennsylvania and also literally pulverized itself, totally disappearing inside a hole six meters by three meters wide and only two meters deep.
Suddenly, Air Force One was "the only plane in the sky." Colonel Mark Tillman, who was on board, recalled: "We get this report that there's a call saying Angel' was next. No one really knows now where the comment came from it got mistranslated or garbled amid the White House, the Situation Room, the radio operators. Angel' was our code name. The fact that they knew about Angel,' well, you had to be in the inner circle."
This means that 19 Arabs with box cutters, and most of all their handlers, surely must have been "in the inner circle." Inevitably, this was never fully investigated.
Already in 1997, Brzezinski had warned, "it is imperative that no Eurasian challenger emerges capable of dominating Eurasia and thus of also challenging America."
In the end, much to the despair of US neocons, all the combined sound and fury of 9/11 and the Global War on Terror/Overseas Contingency Operations, in less than two decades, ended up metastasized into not only a challenger but a Russia-China strategic partnership. This is the real "enemy" not al-Qaeda, a flimsy figment of the CIA's imagination, rehabilitated and sanitized as "moderate rebels" in Syria.

[/FONT]
[/FONT]

https://russia-insider.com/en/going-theo...us/ri27643

[Carsten Wiethoff]

Hi David.
Let me ask you an honest question and would you please give me an honest answer, or no answer at all.
Do you think there is an acceptable way of discussing the events of September 11, 2001 with children and adults worldwide?
What could it be?

I have a proposal, 6 pages of paper that I would be willing to give to you and the world.
Carsten

Seriously.

[Carsten Wiethoff]

[FONT=&amp]Channel 9: "There is a great deal of questions about whether or not the damage and the ultimate destruction of the buildings was caused by the airplanes, by architectural defect or possibly by bombs, or after-shocks. Do you have any thoughts on that?"
Donald Trump: "It wasn't architectural defect. The World Trade Center was always known as a very, very strong building. Don't forget that it took a big bomb in the basement [in 1993]. Now the basement is the most vulnerable place, because that is your foundation and it withstood that. And I got to see that area about 3 or 4 days after it took place, because one of my structural engineers actually took me for a tour because he did the building. And I said I can't believe it'. The building was standing solid and half of the columns were blown out. This was an unbelievably powerful building if you know anything about structure. It was one of the first buildings that was built from the outside. The steel, the reason the WTC had such narrow windows is that in between all the windows you had steel on the outside of the building. That's why when I first looked at it you had big, heavy I-beams. When I first looked at it I couldn't believe it because there was a hole in the steel. And this was steel that was … you remember the width of the windows of the World Trade Center, folks, I think that you know, if you were ever up there, they were quite narrow and in between was this heavy steel. I said: How could a plane, even a 767 or 747 or whatever it might have been, how could it possibly go through the steel? I happen to think that they had not only a plane, but they had bombs that exploded almost simultaneously. [italics mine]. Because I just can't imagine anything being able to go through that wall. Most buildings are built with the steel on the inside around the elevator shafts. This one was built from the outside, which is the strongest structure you can have. And it was almost just like a can of soup."
Channel 9: "You know…we were looking at pictures all morning long of that plane coming into Building #2. And when you see that approach the far side, then all of a sudden within another millisecond the explosion pops out the other side."
Donald Trump: "Right. I just think that there was a plane with more than jet fuel." [italics mine]
Donald Trump may be extremely controversial and all things for all people. But one thing the former real estate developer and current President of the United States does know about is building construction.[/FONT]

In these lines I agree with Trump or at least I think that is an honest assessment by him, which essentially conforms to reality.
Would, today, be repeating similar lines by anyone, say Hillary Clinton, be controversial? Why?

[Carsten Wiethoff]

And if Trump himself would repeat similar words today on live TV, would that be a problem? For whom?

[Carsten Wiethoff]

I feel the urge to give the world an inpression, of how the world looks through my eyes. I do not expect anybody to share my views. I do not expect anybody to be offended, because these are only my very personal views on the world, on persons, events, corporations, states(whatever that means), and anything else. To keep it brief, I have two columns, left column a name, event, corporation, state, etc. in max. three words; right column one or more adjectives or short expressions. The list is necessarily incomplete.
Example: Jesus good man

So here the list goes:
Assange one of the best
Snowden good man
Putin complicated, but good man
Trump complicated, but good man
Bill Clinton bad man
Hillary Clinton one of the worst
John F. Kennedy complicated, but good man
Google once good, now extremely bad
Zuckerberg bad man, may be rescued
Facebook genius, now extremely bad
Deep Politics Forum one of the best
Carsten Wiethoff good man, improving


For the Brits:
Thatcher bad woman
May good woman
Johnson dead in the ditch

Some parties in Germany:
Die Linke problematic, but good
Afd problematic, may be rescued
SPD corrupt, defunct
CDU corrupt, defunct
CSU corrupt, defunct
Grüne corrupt, partly bad, may be rescued
Piraten good
Die Partei one of the best



Some organizations:
NATO corrupt, defunct, dangerous
EU was good, corrupt, defunct
UN one of the best, defunct

For discussion please use PM or new thread. Thank You.

[David Guyatt]

Hi David.
Let me ask you an honest question and would you please give me an honest answer, or no answer at all.
Do you think there is an acceptable way of discussing the events of September 11, 2001 with children and adults worldwide?
What could it be?

I have a proposal, 6 pages of paper that I would be willing to give to you and the world.
Carsten

Seriously.

Carsten, children? I suspect not.

My reasoning is that it's difficult enough - in fact, often impossible - to get grown adults to break out of the propaganda cocoon and thought control that decades of state narratives and ingrained thought training has inculcated in most people since childhood.

But youth and young adults (and upwards) is certainly an audience that can be educated to have their eyes and ears opened. But it is no easy task. Some of my own grandchildren fit into these categories and are aware of my views. They certainly don't have to agree with me, that for certain. But I do care that they have the ability to think critically and learn to be as objective and factual as possible.

However, the central problem is that we humans are hopelessly unable to even recognise (or at least accept - blaming other instead) the lies we tell ourselves that it makes us suckers for the lies told by slick-tongued professional politicians etc.

Hope this helps.

PS, feel free to PM me your 6 pages...