Monthly Archives: December 2010

FBI told Clinton prosecutor about details of 9/11 weeks in advance

By Craig McKee

If you’ve heard of David Philip Schippers at all, chances are you remember him going head to head with former president Bill Clinton.
Schippers, a Democrat, was the special prosecutor in the Clinton impeachment case in the late 1990s. He was also the former Chief Investigative Counsel for the U.S. House Judiciary Committee. Not exactly an anti-establishment figure.
But when it comes to 9/11, Schippers has some things to say that shake the foundations of the official story.
Just two days after 9/11, Schippers went public with the explosive statement that he had been told by FBI agents months before 9/11 that there would be a massive terrorist attack targeting the financial arteries of lower Manhattan. The revelation came in an interview he did on WRRK in Pittsburgh.
These agents, who were reportedly from Illinois and Minnesota, confided in Schippers that they knew the location and date of the “impending attacks.” They even knew the names of the hijackers and the sources of their funding! Continue reading

Taxi driver comes close to admitting he was part of 9/11 cover story

December 27, 2010

By Craig McKee

If there is an Achilles heel to the official 9/11 cover story, it has to be Lloyde England.
The Washington D.C. taxi driver is an essential part of the official story that American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon at 9:38 a.m. on Sept. 11, 2001. His car is supposed to have been hit by one of the light poles knocked over by the plane right before it hit the Pentagon. This story was supposed to offer rock solid confirmation of the Pentagon government account. Instead, it’s the weakest link.
Not only is England’s version of what happened to him that day not supported by the witnesses or the physical evidence (as we shall see), but in an unguarded moment in the film National Security Alert (by Citizen Investigation Team), England came very close to admitting he had been a part of the conspiracy.
England told CIT (he didn’t realize the camera was running, but he clearly Continue reading

War games: timing of 9/11 exercises offer too many coincidences

By Craig McKee

It was the first thing that made me suspicious.
At 8:21 a.m. on Sept. 11, 2001, it was clear that unknown parties had hijacked American Airlines Flight 11 from Boston to Los Angeles. Fighters were unable to intercept the plane before it crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center at 8:46. Seventeen minutes later, United Airlines Flight 175, also a Boston to Los Angeles run, hit the South Tower.
How could these planes reach their targets without encountering any opposition from the incredibly powerful and expensive U.S. military? Under normal circumstances, they couldn’t. But this day was anything but typical. In fact, nothing – from protocol to the laws of physics – operated as it should have on 9/11.
By the time the second tower had been hit, it was already known that American Airlines Flight 77 out of Washington D.C. had been hijacked. That flight, too, managed to fly around the northeast United States for more than 40 minutes before it allegedly flew into the Continue reading

Aerial illusion: facts support 757 flying over, not into the Pentagon

By Craig McKee

You have to admire the creativity. And you have to admire the sheer scale of the deception.
One of the largest examples of misdirection ever attempted has, for the most part, worked. But that’s only because people haven’t looked closely at the evidence.
It seems clear that a large airliner did fly towards the Pentagon just after 9:30 a.m. on Sept. 11, 2001 (I’ll get to how we know this momentarily). It is also clear that there was a large explosion that rocked the outer ring of the building as the plane arrived at its supposed target. But there’s one more thing that is clear: the plane didn’t hit the building and didn’t cause the explosion.
American Airlines Flight 77, a Boeing 757, was supposedly flown into the Pentagon at 530 miles per hour by an incompetent pilot who was denied permission to rent a Cessna the month before because of his poor flying skills. After negotiating an incredible 330-degree spiral descent, alleged hijacker Hani Hanjour is supposed to have flown just a few feet above the ground, hitting five light poles before crashing into the ground floor of a newly renovated section of the Pentagon.
There are two main reasons why the evidence supports the conclusion that the plane the witnesses saw never hit the building – and that it flew over. One is that the Flight Data Continue reading

Fear, deception and power: how we happily relinquish our freedoms

By Craig McKee

We’re being played like a fine musical instrument.
We often don’t know it, and we don’t want to know it. The truth about how we’re being controlled and manipulated is harsh and unpleasant to contemplate. Instead of accepting it, we prefer to reinforce the illusion of our own freedom.
With shocking events like 9/11, the Kennedy assassination, and numerous apparent acts of international terrorism, we are “traumatized” into willingly transferring what little power we have left to a small but powerful elite that has its own agenda. And the process is accelerating.
Imprisonment without trial, wiretaps without warrants, video surveillance, efforts to control and restrict the Internet, torturing of detainees, monitoring of private emails, and the innovation of airport “body” scanners, are all part of the increasing consolidation of control. And it’s all under the guise of “security.” Continue reading

Is Internet control the prize in supposed ‘cyber war’ over WikiLeaks?

December 12, 2010

By Craig McKee

I can’t help but get the feeling that there’s more to the whole WikiLeaks phenomenon than meets the eye. A lot more.
On the surface of it, this organization and its public face, Julian Assange, seem like the best things to come along since Daniel Ellsberg leaked the Pentagon Papers. Like many people who believe in transparency, and that secrecy is the enemy of democracy, I want very much to believe in WikiLeaks.
But frankly, the whole thing is making me very uneasy. It all seems too good to be true, and you know what they say about things that can be described that way.
I love the fact that the fledgling organization (which seemed to spring from nowhere in 2007) has released literally hundreds of thousands of documents, videos, and diplomatic cables. This material has shone a light on a number of very bad things the American government and other governments around the world have done and are doing. And the rhetoric on their web site is right up my alley.
Take this excerpt from the “about” section of the WikiLeaks site:
“Consider Daniel Ellsberg, working within the US government during the Vietnam War. He comes into contact with the Pentagon Papers, a meticulously kept record of military and Continue reading

Giuliani among witnesses who confirm 'impossible' molten metal

December 8, 2010

By Craig McKee

It’s one of the most inconvenient truths of 9/11: molten metal.
Those who support the official government conspiracy theory brush off the question of why there were large pools of molten metal under the World Trade Center for months after the attacks. They won’t give you an answer because there isn’t an answer that fits with their “official story.”
Not one explanation that makes any sense has been given to explain what many eyewitnesses reported.
In the comment streams of this blog and others I’ve seen, doubt has been raised about whether we really know that this molten metal was even there. One person in particular has thrown around ideas like the pools being made up of molten aluminum from the planes. If someone thinks that hypothesis is worth their time to analyze, be my guest. I don’t. On top of not being supported by any evidence at all, it doesn’t work because Building 7, which collapsed even though it wasn’t hit by a plane, also had molten metal pools under it. The source for this is NASA Continue reading

Media ‘watchdogs’ attack tiny 9/11 opening from Rivera, Napolitano

December 3, 2010

By Craig McKee

It’s the damndest thing.  Two media watchdogs from opposite sides of the fence are attacking Fox News, my most hated news organization, and I’m on Fox’s side.
To a point.
The liberal “media watchdog” Media Matters for America has attacked Fox News host Geraldo Rivera and Judge Andrew Napolitano for considering the possibility that we haven’t been told the whole story about how World Trade Center Building 7 collapsed on Sept. 11, 2001 ( A similar attack has come from Newsbusters, a conservative “media watchdog.”
The idea that the government has lied to the world about 9/11 has always been ridiculed at Fox – and Rivera was one of those doing the ridiculing. But the campaign called Building What? (which ran TV ads in November questioning the official explanation about Building 7) has made an impression. Besides being seen by millions of New Yorkers, the campaign has persuaded Rivera to rethink his long-held belief that Truthers were a Continue reading