The Grand Deception: A Second Look At The War On Terrorism
This guy was on it from the get go. G. Edward Griffin details tyranny’s need for ‘terrorism’.
And this from shortly after the attacks of September 11th. This really is a must read when it comes to the full dynamics at work with how societies react to violent attack, and who stands to benefit from those reactions.
In 1982 I produced a video documentary entitled No Place to Hide; The Strategy and Tactics of Terrorism. Immediately after Tuesday’s attack, I began to get inquiries about the program. Friends who possessed copies ran them on public-access cable. Suddenly, the video, which had remained almost forgotten in the back pages of our catalogue, became a best seller. There is good reason for that. When I did the research for this topic, I discovered that terrorism involves a lot more than just blowing things up and killing people. There is a well-defined strategy behind it that has to do with the anticipated reaction of the target government and its citizens. Terrorists themselves phrase it this way: The action is in the reaction. They know that, after repeated attacks, people will become angry with their leaders for not preventing terrorism. This sets citizens against their own government. They also know that terrorist attacks will cause people to curtail travel, business ventures, and the purchase of luxuries, all of which will depress the economy. In our modern age, many people have come to think that the health of the economy is government’s responsibility. So, any decline in the market, loss of jobs or purchasing power will also be blamed on the government, making it even more unpopular. The most important reaction, however, is that terrorism causes the target government to respond with police state measures against its own citizens.
Read The Full Article Here
By the way, has anyone seen photos or videos of the plane crashing into the Pentagon on September 11th? And why did WTC building 7, a 47-story steel structure, collapse all on its own hours after the attacks that morning, even though it was not even hit by anything on that day? If anyone has any answers, please feel free to post them in the comments section below.
on July 3rd, 2006 at 8:47 pm
the only thing i can personally remember regarding wtc7 that was in obvious contradiction to the 9/11 commission report is an interview with larry silverstein (wtc’s owner on 9/11) in the 2002 PBS documentary “America Rebuilds: A Year at Ground Zero” who reported that on the day of 9/11, he, along with the NYFD, decided “to pull” wt7. i was puzzled as to why the owner of the building reported to PBS that wtc7 was a controlled demolition, while the 9/11 commision would then tell the american people the collapse was caused by “fires started by falling debris”. its also interesting to find who the tenants of wtc7 were on 9/11…
this and day-of reports that the collapses appeared to be “controlled demolitions” were the only questions i observed to be initially raised by the semi-mass media. however, other outlets have reported and consolidated other contrary accounts. i’ve read many theories, since as far back as nov. 2002, but nothing has been more comprehensive than well-produced than “Loose Change: Second Edition”.
for now, you can watch it free on google video, or order a copy for a couple bucks on ebay. if you take the time to watch the whole thing and consider its implications, you may find yourself on course for a dramatic paradigm shift in regards to your understanding of the purpose of the war of terror.
interested?
Loose Change: Second Edition