Incendiary Advice

There's simply too much evidence and information to dismiss if one is to assume 9/11 happened without any advance knowledge, without a hint. But I know people, myself included for awhile afterwards, who have refused to entertain anything but the standard mythology we've been given regarding the events surrounding that day.

If we're ever to have a real national discussion (and not rely on that lovely book sitting on my dresser, written by the "commission") some of these videos are good jumping-off points. Start with this one - Project for a New American Century and its now renowned document Rebuilding America's Defenses - that says such a radical foreign policy would likely not be embraced by the American public "absent a catastrophic and cataclysmic event, like a new Pearl Harbor."

The video states that it was written in 2000. Other documentation I've read lists 1998. No matter, really. It's all about what's inside. Also at that site linked above are other videos

As time goes by, many people become more aware of inconsistent statements, strange coincidences and odd actions by various members of the government on or in reference to 9/11. I don't claim to understand or believe all of it, but like everyone else, even after reading the official commission report, I have specific questions and concerns. The quasi-official detail of events stretches credulity. And then there's the Moussaoui trial, bringing so much of it back under a spotlight.

Some particularly disturbing testimony in the trial from FBI agent Samit this week. Take a look. It raises serious questions on what the government knew and when they knew it.