USCENTCOM Sergeant Blows Whistle On 9/11 Inside Job

[pisshead]

that bin laden's quite a tricky guy to have pulled off so much on 9/11...of course the 19 freedom hating muslim conspiracy is just a fairy tale.

most people like this think they're all alone in questioning the official fairy tale...because you hardly hear a word of it on mainstream tv...it's good to see more and more and more people going public like this.


Claim: USCENTCOM Sergeant Blows Whistle On 9/11 Inside Job
Blogosphere debate rages as to whether "Chavez" is real or disinfo
Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | September 25 2006 (http://prisonplanet.com/)

UPDATE: Sergeant Chavez has now provided us with evidence of his credentials - the pdf can be viewed here (http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/LChavez_214.pdf).

An individual describing himself as a Sergeant stationed at MacDill AFB claims he witnessed unusual preparations for a potential airplane hitting the base on the morning of 9/11 and publicly questions the NORAD stand down and the demolition of the twin towers. Many have reacted to the claims by warning of a hoax designed to poison the well of the 9/11 truth movement.

In a letter that first appeared on the 9/11 Veterans For Truth Website (http://www.v911t.org/SergeantLauroChavez.php), Sergeant Lauro "LJ" Chavez responds to a Cincinnati Post hit piece article (http://news.cincypost.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060803/NEWS01/608030348/-1/all) by outlining his own doubts about the official version of 9/11 and his personal experiences of the strange prelude to the events of that morning.

"From 1995 till 2002 I was a Sergeant in the United States Army. Not only this, but I was stationed at United States Central Command, which is located at MacDill AFB in Tampa Florida. I was on active duty when 9-11 happened. In the days prior to the tragedies, we were involved in many exercises. Some of these exercises included the scenarios of hijacked planes crashing into, our building the world trade center, the White House, Sears Tower, and the Pentagon. These drills or exercises as we called them, where classified Top Secret. Having a Top Secret rated clearance I was dumbfounded that they would ever push a training exercise above the level of Secret. Over my 8 years in the Army, I had participated in many exercises around the world, none of which were ever classified over the Secret level."

"Back to the morning of 9-11; the command was busy with this training exercise. We were instructed to bring all our gear in to prep for a mock (staged) deployment to the Middle East. On the morning of 9-11 I had been on base prepped and ready to go since about 0400am. During my time at the base that morning, they were setting up barriers around the command and placing gun posts on the roofs. When I questioned one of the security officers about the machine gun and shoulder fired rockets on the roof I was given the answer its a precaution for a plane attempting to crash into this building."

Chavez said that he was in a "Secure Compartmented Information Facility), which is basically this underground bunker command post for USCENTCOM," watching the real and exercise radar blips from planes on an aerospace grid and that intercept planes were sent up from Andrews AFP to deliberately ensure the capital was left largely defenseless.

Chavez later relates his colleague's first reaction to the collapse of the twin towers.

"To delve even further, as Im standing there watching the towers collapse, next to me is one of my good friends and a former commander of the Army Corps of Engineers. He is a demolitions expert. He was even more surprised than me. When the towers collapsed he kept saying this isnt right, this isnt right. When I asked him what he was talking about he told me that steel buildings dont fall down that way. Even if they are struck by objects; he went on to say that in theory if the top 10 floors were hit, then possibly just that part of the building would fall over and off, but the rest would remain standing. When I asked him, not understanding the implications of demolitions, he told me that it looked as if they were brought down by controlled demolitions. I was utterly amazed, but after he said that it did sort of appear that way."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The DVD of the resistance!" watch it for free at Google Video (http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/september2006/200906terrorstorm.htm).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A Google search failed to produce any reference to a Sergeant Lauro Chavez having been stationed at MacDill AFB. In addition, the letter was not posted on the Cincinnati Post website.

Chavez' perceived inability to prove his credentials has led many to question whether the letter is a hoax designed to poison the well of the 9/11 truth movement - or a simple prank.

The 9/11 Blogger website (http://www.911blogger.com/node/3116) brimmed with forthright denouncements of the story as a hoax.

Citing contradictions between the 9/11 timeline and Chavez' statements, many argued that the letter was just cobbled together accusations culled from 9/11 Internet videos.

Others questioned the likelihood of a presumably still active duty young Sergeant risking his pension and livelihood for the sake of writing a letter to a newspaper.

"If this is true then this guy wouldn't blow the whistle by responding to an editorial for a newspaper. This guy would be breaking this news on all the 9/11 Truth websites and be doing interviews galore."

Another poster claims to know Chavez and describes him as "a bit of a prankster."

A poster later identifying himself as Chavez wrote "I didnt choose to come out and blow the whistle - it chose its own time," "I fear not death, but I do fear for my children growing up in this world."

Until Chavez can provide documents that prove his position and tenure at MacDill AFB, we have to reserve judgment. If such evidence is not forthcoming this story will be dismissed as a hoax.

Sergeant Chavez is welcome to provide me with that evidence by e mail ([email protected]) and I will gladly write a follow up story. I'm sure I can speak for Alex Jones in inviting Chavez to appear on The Alex Jones Show to elaborate on his story if it is indeed genuine.

[pisshead]

Refuting the lie, a response to Popular Mechanics: debunking 9/11 myths
Craig Schlanger | September 25 2006 (http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_1242.shtml)

Itâ??s been an exciting year to be a 9/11 Truth Seeker. With each passing month thereâ??s been a trend of continuing revelations and historic events that will break the dam of government deception once and for all. There have been actors, musicians, scientists, engineers, former presidential cabinet members, rescue workers, survivors, historians, and even foreign officials weighing in with their doubts about the official 9/11 narrative.

Recent polls by both Zogby and Scripts Howard show the number of Americans questioning the government about 9/11 to be growing exponentially. When they know you have the truth on your side, those who stand to lose will employ the most underhanded tactics to keep their own conspiracy theory alive.

As if right on cue, Popular Mechanics returns to the arena of 9/11 Truth to present an extension of their March 2005 hit piece, â??Debunking 9/11 Lies: Conspiracy Theories Canâ??t Stand up to the Hard Facts.â?� Now theyâ??ve taken the original piece and extended it into a book-length format. In view of the fifth anniversary of 9/11 and the 9/11 Truth movement gaining more mainstream coverage than ever, itâ??s only to be expected that an attack on the movementâ??s credibility would emerge.

On the inside cover of the book there is a list of endorsements from some well-known talking heads. For example, Glen Reynolds, proprietor of the neocon blog Instapundit.com, takes time away from equating the people of Lebanon with Nazis (see Instapundit.com, 8/13/06) to endorse this collection of â??hard facts.â?�

However, for the ultimate grand slam, Popular Mechanics (and by association Hearst Publishing) chose to enlist the literary talent of Americaâ??s â??maverickâ?� Senator John McCain for the bookâ??s forward. Senator McCain tows an extremely Orwellian line, reminding readers that Americans were attacked for their freedoms on 9/11 and that the evidence of al Qaedaâ??s central role in the attacks is â??overwhelming.â?� (p. xii) The senator explains that over the years many Americans have had trouble accepting such historical occurrences as the â??surpriseâ?� attack on Pearl Harbor or the murder of a president by a lone gunman in a book depository. Certainly Senator McCain knows better, and I would imagine he has access to the same declassified documents that I do, which prove both claims to be incorrect. But before plucking the reader from the rabbit hole, McCain goes for the grand slam by claiming that anyone who questions the official 9/11 narrative is directly insulting all who tragically perished on that day, as well as â??those who have fought in all the wars in our history.â?� (p. xiv) The suggestion here clearly is that any questioning of the governmentâ??s official line is treasonous.

In the interest of time, I will not go through each â??mythâ?� and refute it point by point. Since this book contains most of the same information as the original Popular Mechanics article, I would instead recommend that the reader track down Jim Hoffmanâ??s excellent piece in Global Outlook Magazine #10. A more detailed piece by Peter Meyer was also posted on the Serendipity website last year. Other responses have come from Alex Jones, as well from the always resourceful website, Killtown.

Itâ??s important to note from the start that this book is not meant to debunk anything. Itsâ?? main purpose is to craft a mindset where anyone who questions the official 9/11 story likely spends their weekends at Roswell.

This is a psychological attack on those who dare question their governmentâ??s account of a most tragic day in our history; itâ??s a return fire in an ongoing information war. The purpose is not to answer pressing questions. Instead, the writers choose the path of assassinating the character of anyone who dares ask such questions. Additionally, the book plants a seed in the mind of the reader that all 9/11 Truth seekers agree on every â??mythâ?� discussed. To reinforce this, the editors focus on major strawman arguments that I will discuss briefly.

Starting on page 8, a section focuses on an unsupported theory that the planes that hit WTC 1 and 2 were carrying pods that unloaded a cargo upon impact. As both of the pieces cited above (Global Research, and Meyer's) pointed out, this is an argument that has been made by a handful of fringe 9/11 activists and popularized in the widely discredited â??In Plane Siteâ?� video. It usually goes hand in hand with the â??no windows on the planeâ?� theory regarding flights United 175 and American 11. This can be disproved by simply examining video and photographic evidence. These two arguments are analogous to the Umbrella Man theory in the JFK assassination.

The editors donâ??t do so well in trying to pull together a theory that explains the lack of air defense. Popular Mechanics wants the reader to believe that there was no air response simply because there was no protocol for intercepting domestically hijacked planes previous to 9/11. Some simple background research on NORAD, FAA or Department of Defense regulations should clear this up entirely.

Rather than refute what the book does tell us, itâ??s important to acknowledge what it does not report. As discussed in numerous arenas, including Capital Hill testimony by Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Richard Myers, there were a number of military war games taking place on the morning of 9/11. A consequence of the war games was that instead of seeing four hijacked aircraft on their screen, the honest people at NORAD were looking at nearly 30. Popular Mechanics doesnâ??t even mention these and the impact they may have had on a successful air defense campaign. This absolutely warrants discussion.

The book then shifts to the question of what exactly hit the Pentagon. This is the most wildly debated and divisive topic in the 9/11 Truth movement. Few people agree on the specifics: some say the building was struck by a missile, some say a commercial plane, while others feel that Flight 77 indeed hit the Pentagon. So while few of us agree completely on what did happen at the Pentagon, almost all skeptics agree that something smells rotten here. Video of the second plane hitting the WTC has become the iconic image of the horrific events of that day. However, we have never seen any photographic evidence of a 757 crashing into the Pentagon. This seems a bit strange when you consider that weâ??re talking about the most heavily guarded and visually monitored building in the country. The Pentagon has cameras covering it at all angles such that the image of a plane should at least register as a large blur.

But to this day, we have not been given much more than five still video frames. These frames do not show any visual evidence of a 757. Add to that the immediate seizure of videotape from a nearby Citgo Station and Sheraton Hotel and red flags should shoot up. The government has said that they do have multiple videos of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon.

However, when the DOD responded to a FOIA request by the right-wing organization Judicial Watch to release footage that would put â??conspiracy theoriesâ?� to rest, what was released was actually described as â??underwhelmingâ?� by a Fox News reporter. Indeed, this was the governmentâ??s big opportunity to make their case. Instead, we were given no clear evidence of Flight 77, but what looked like still photos taken from almost the same angle as the previously released frames. If there is photographic evidence, which at least one of the 84 other surveillance cameras should have caught, why not release them all and shut us up?

The Pentagon section of the book offers a good example of some of the many inconsistencies present in this book. On page 61, the editors remind the reader that â??it was unrealistic to think that the low-quality security camera image would reveal the crystal clear image of a Boeing 757 traveling at 780 feet per second.â?� Now turn to page 63 under the section titled â??Flight 77 Debris.â?? Here William Kagasse is quoted as saying, â??It [Flight 77] was close enough that I could see the windows and the blinds had been pulled down. I read American Airlines on it . . . I saw the aircraft above my head about 80 feet off the ground.â?� This quote was aired on ABCâ??s Nightline. According to Mr. Kagasse, the plane was extraordinarily identifiable down to specific details of the position of the window shades.

So which is it? If Mr. Kagasse was able to leave the scene with such detail, how could not one single security camera capture at least the blurry outline of a plane?

When discussing the size of the hole caused by the plane, we run into another psychological tactic frequently employed in the book. As stated previously, the Pentagon is one of the most hotly debated aspects of the official 9/11 narrative. There are hundreds of web sites that explore the events of 9/11 with some entirely dedicated to the incident at the Pentagon. Yet, Popular Mechanics chose to cite www.the7thfire.com (http://www.the7thfire.com) as their primary source for their information on the Pentagon. Why do that when sites such as www.pentagonresearch.com (http://www.pentagonresearch.com) exist to focus solely on this topic?

I can answer that pretty easily. If the reader decided to check the source given, they would find themselves on a web site dedicated to new age topics such as dream catchers and miracles. Information related to 9/11 is something of a footnote in the grand scene of the page. The implication would be that those who question 9/11 typically sit around talking mind control and â??The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion,â?� both of which are hot topics on the site. This is pure misrepresentation.

Continuing the trend of misrepresentation, the editors went out of their way to tie as many sources as possible to Holocaust deniers. One example would be their choice to cite an article from www.rense.com (http://www.rense.com), noting afterwards that the site focuses frequently on Zionism and Holocaust denial. The message being that if the reader was starting to empathize with these conspiracy nuts, they should be aware that anti-Semitism dominates the movement. Nothing could be further from the truth. There will always be those who pin every wrongdoing in the world on Jews, Zionists and Israel.

Perhaps the most ludicrous assertion made in the entire book relates to WTC Building 7. Building 7 is often seen as the smoking gun of 9/11 research, based on its classic demolition-style collapse and lack of coverage in the â??9/11 Commission Report.â?� Leaseholder Larry Silverstein also made an infamous confession in a PBS documentary. Mr. Silverstein states that he instructed the fire department commander to â??pullâ?� the building at 5:20PM. While some have argued that the first two towers collapsed because of the combination of fire and plane impact, the same could not be said of Building 7. While there were fires (pictured in the book), it was not hit by any aircraft. When combining the fact that the building collapsed at near free fall speed with Mr. Silversteinâ??s comments, this would seem an open and shut case: World Trade Center Building 7 was demolished. Mr. Silverstein later emerges to explain that by â??pull it,â?� he was referring to removal of the fire fighters from the building. This is troubling when you factor in that the New York Times reported on November 29, 2001, that by 11:30 am all firefighters had been removed from the area due to safety concerns. Further, FEMAâ??s initial report indicated that there was only light structural damage caused by the fires.

In fact, FEMA has all but literally scratched their proverbial heads in trying to explain the building collapse.

The editors also decided to take on the definition of â??pull itâ?� once and for all. After speaking with four unnamed demolition and engineering experts, they claim that not one of these individuals have ever heard the term â??pull itâ?� to describe controlled demolition. Instead the term is a reference to a procedure where a building is cut at the foundation and literally pulled over. To cover themselves, Popular Mechanics made sure to include a mention that the technique of literally pulling a building over itself was tried unsuccessfully on buildings 5 and 6. However, the aforementioned documentary showed a demolition team announcing that they were about to â??pullâ?� one of the other buildings. Once the order is given, the building clearly collapses in perfect symmetry. So it would seem that the attempts to â??pullâ?� the buildings were quite successful.

Since the publication of the original Popular Mechanics piece, Brigham Young University Physics Professor Steven Jones has released one of the most vital studies in 9/11 truth. Last year Dr. Jones began to study the possibility of a thermite reaction at both of the main towers of the WTC, thus causing their collapse. Further, Dr. Jones recently obtained a piece of debris from the rubble and was able to positively test it for the existence of compounds that would be consistent with a thermite reaction. As Dr. Jonesâ??s study is very well sourced and thorough, the study must obviously be discredited in some fashion. Popular Mechanics carted out several metallurgic professors who disagree with the Jones hypothesis. They also quote Mark Loizeaux, president of Controlled Demolition, Inc.,, who was contracted to remove all debris from ground zero. Mr. Loizeaux explaines that, "Dr. Jones misunderstands the properties of explosive charges.â?�

Other than Mr. Loizeauxâ??s title, no other credentials are cited for him to make such an assertion. Finally, itâ??s noted that, â??Dr. Jones primary field of study at BYU (Brigham Young University) is metal-catalyzed or cold fusion, a study that is unrelated to engineering or the performance of tall buildings.â?� The key word here is â??primary.â?� While Dr. Jones may focus on such said issues in his studies at BYU, it does not mean that he hasnâ??t studied basic physics and metallurgy. So once again, the reader is to rely on assumptions and half-truths in the face of irrefutable evidence and dictates of logic.

Like a jury delivering a verdict, the book ends with a 20-page epilogue that serves as an indictment of the mind of â??the conspiracy theorist.â?�

Popular Mechanics Editor-In-Chief James B. Meigs manages to invoke the Illuminati, New World Order, and Zionism in the first sentence. Meigs cites numerous pieces of hate mail he has received, which accuse him of being everything from a government shill to a MOSSAD agent. Ironically, most of the charges leveled against people questioning the official 9/11 story are tactics employed throughout this book. A few examples include, but are not limited to, marginalization of opposing views, guilt by association, slipshod handling of facts, demonization and circular reasoning.

To his credit, Meigs acknowledges the questions some raised about the relationship between Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff and Benjamin Chertoff, head of the magazineâ??s research department. Meigâ??s admits that they are likely related, but have never met and had no contact for the purpose of the 2005 article. This is a great example of the use of circular reasoning. It defies logic to think that, in writing a story like this, any journalist worth his/her weight wouldnâ??t cover all the bases. In this case, if a member of your staff is related to the head of the very agency that was born out of the ashes of 9/11, why not tap into that resource? It would seem to be as good a time as any for a Chertoff family reunion.

Let me be clear. I do not pretend to know exactly what happened on 9/11: I also have my disagreements with many of the theories that have been put out there over the years. What I do know is that what the people were told happened on 9/11 is not the truth. If Americans are to take any lessons from history, it is that those in power will redefine the truth in a way that bests suits their interests and agenda. Those who stand to profit from an event like 9/11 have no interest in opening themselves up to any line of questioning. They also suffer in that the facts are not on their side. This book tries to serve as the bandage for a gaping wound in the official 9/11 narrative. Unfortunately for those in charge, that wound shows no signs of healing.

[pisshead]

CENTCOM Sergeant Details Traitorous Stand Down Orders On 9/11
Military whistleblower comes forward with key information
Steve Watson / Infowars | September 26 2006 (http://infowars.net/)
Alex Jones was joined on air yesterday by a former Sergeant in the United States Army named Lauro "LJ" Chavez. Chavez was stationed at MacDill AFB where he claims he witnessed unusual preparations for a potential airplane hitting the base on the morning of 9/11 and distinctly heard officers talking about a stand down. This has led him to go public in questioning the NORAD stand down and the demolition of the twin towers.
In a letter that first appeared on the 9/11 Veterans For Truth Website (http://www.v911t.org/SergeantLauroChavez.php), Sergeant Lauro "LJ" Chavez responds to a Cincinnati Post hit piece (http://news.cincypost.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060803/NEWS01/608030348/-1/all) article by outlining his own doubts about the official version of 9/11 and his personal experiences of the strange prelude to the events of that morning.
Despite early (and healthy) reactions claiming this may be a hoax designed to poison the well of the 9/11 truth movement, Sergeant Chavez has now provided us with evidence of his credentials, his honorable discharge documents showing the military installations he was located inside. The last station he held was inside United States Central Command in Tampa - the pdf can be viewed here. (http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/LChavez_214.pdf)
Mr Chavez was quick to point out that he does not have all the answers, but does have what he feels is vital information regarding the events of 9/11:
''I'm in no way in a position to tell people that 'this is the official story so believe me', no, I want to give people the information so they can go away and look for themselves and formulate a logical decision with all the evidence." Chavez said.
Mr Chavez worked within CENTCOM (http://www.centcom.mil/), one of the five American regional unified commands consisting of Marines, Navy and air force officers. CENTCOM's area of jurisdiction is in the Middle East, East Africa and Central Asia. CENTCOM has been the main American presence in many military operations, including the Persian Gulf War, the United States war in Afghanistan, and the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Chavez was stationed at CENTCOM's headquarters at MacDill AFB, in Tampa, Florida. His commanding officer was Four Star General Tommy Franks.
Chavez worked in the J6 department that was in charge of all the computer systems, the network backbone of CENTCOM. Chavez ran a team of six soldiers on the helpdesk network side. He was personally responsible for the maintenance of commanding officers computers, including those of General Tommy Franks. He has letters of recommendation from Franks and even went to Franks' house to work on his computers.
Chavez described how the military has a ring of computer networks according to different security clearance levels. Chavez worked only with systems classified as top secret or higher.
On the morning before 9/11 Chavez was in the Secure Compartmented Information Facility, the secure bunker at the base of CENTCOM HQ which is populated by high ranking military intelligence personnel. This is a facility that requires a top secret gamma clearance. Inside are systems that can monitor weather systems and flight paths of all aircraft within the country.
That day he was involved with supporting computer equipment being used in the Vigilant Guardian exercise and another exercise based in Egypt. On this day Chavez got to see information that he wasn't supposed to see.
"I was working on psyops commander's computer and next to his PC was a top secret document that was open, his neglect was my ally, I was sitting there working on his computer and was waiting for some passes to download and I look over and I'm reading the document, and it's the off order for the exercise that they are participating in."
This raises major questions because normally wargames or exercises are not classified as top secret as it is a requirement to let some information be public, especially if the exercise is taking place in a populated area.
Chavez continued:
"So I'm reading this document and it's giving proposed situations for scenarios for this wargame the scenarios include a hijacked plane, most of them were hijacked planes, I saw one that was like a car bomb trying to blow up something, but one of them was a hijacked plane crashing into a nuclear power plant in California, the Sears Tower, the World Trade Center, The Pentagon obviously, the White House, our building was one of the targets as well."
Chavez went on to describe how CENTCOM HQ was being heavily fortified the day before 9/11 and access to the base was restricted to top secret personnel only. This ties in with a declaration of Martial Law by Jeb Bush two days previously throughout the entirety of Florida.
Chavez also described how during the exercises the aerospace grid with "enemy" blips on it has to be piped in to the air traffic controllers of all the airports in the affected area so they know there is a military exercise going on. This ties in with the released NORAD/NEADS and FAA tapes and accounts that are riddled with references to the drills and exercises taking place on 9/11.
Chavez described the plot as "genius" and stated:
"If you want to crash planes into a building, and you've got the aerospace grid at your beckoning call, so you put a bunch of blips on it so no one knows which ones are real and which ones are fake... All you have to do is have someone in charge of the computer systems to put the blips on the screen and then you can do whatever you want."
Chavez proceeded to detail the key discussions that he heard inside the bunker on the day of 9/11:
"I didn't get to see tower one hit, I was in there talking with individuals and i was tired, I'd been there since four in the morning. Then all of a sudden everybody started hustling and bustling. it was like NASA when Apollo 13 was about to crash, everybody running around, and then they put it on the big screen, CNN with the tower on fire.
Then we see the other plane come in and hit it and at that point everybody is standing up. The air force had commanders in contact with NORAD. The plane, or whatever, hit the Pentagon and then we were like 'Why aren't they scrambling jets?' We were asking, there was eight or nine people... Colonels and Lieutenant Colonels asking the Lieutenant Colonel in charge of the air force 'why isn't NORAD scrambling jets? and he said 'we received an order to stand down''. And that just perplexed everybody."
Mr Chavez did not know the Lieutenant Colonel and so does not know his name, yet if he can be identified, then we have uncovered a direct link to the stand down order. If that man or any others who were present at CENTCOM on 9/11 can be identified and made to testify under oath, then the whole cover operation could be blown. A real independent investigation would have secured this.
The entire riveting interview is freely available online at Prisonplanet.tv (http://prisonplanet.tv/audio/260906chavez.mp3)now. Please spread this information far and wide.
Mr Chavez has since been informed that the computer company he now works for, as information security manager, has been receiving threatening phone calls demanding his dismissal. Mr Chavez is another example of someone who is bravely putting his career, reputation and life on the line to get the truth out about the 9/11 cover up.

[the image reaper]

this has been the biggest waste of bandwidth I've witnessed in quite awhile ... you need to clean your head out ... btw, your name fits ... :D

[Krogith]

watch something then http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4757274759497686216&q=terror+storm

[pisshead]

don't bother krogith...some people want to be lied to...it's easier to believe the 19 freedom hating hijacker conspiracy than to actually have to question what's happening to our country...

Former Governor Jesse Ventura Questions Official 9/11 Story
Goes further than ever before, cites Northwoods, Gulf of Tonkin, NORAD stand down, staged war provocations
Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones/Prison Planet.com | September 26 2006 (http://prisonplanet.com/)
Former Minnesota Governor, actor and wrestling star Jesse Ventura has publicly questioned the official version of events behind 9/11 and gone further than ever before in citing Operation Northwoods and the Gulf of Tonkin as examples of how the government has planned and carried out staged war provocations in the past.
Ventura has temporarily left his Baja Mexico surfing lifestyle to lend support to Texas gubernatorial candidate Kinky Friedman. At a press conference yesterday (http://www.casperstartribune.net/articles/2006/09/26/ap/politics/d8kcepp00.txt) Ventura said that the Republicans and Democrats were "destroying our country" and its political process. Sporting a beard and dreadlocks, the former Vietnam veteran also criticized the Iraq war.
Alex Jones and his film crew were able to set up a last minute interview with Ventura at a San Antonio restaurant after his appearance before a packed house at UTSA.
Ventura first stated that he had many unanswered questions about 9/11. The former Governor cited Operation Northwoods (http://www.gwu.edu/%7Ensarchiv/news/20010430/), a 1963 Joint Chiefs of Staff plan to stage terror attacks and kill American citizens to start a war with Cuba, as an example of how the U.S. government wanted to kill its own people and blame it on foreign enemies to justify war. Ventura found it painful, having dutifully served himself, that elements within the government would go to such barbaric and deceitful lengths to con its own populace into supporting militarism.
Ventura then raised the issue of the Gulf of Tonkin, citing recently released declassified information (http://www.gwu.edu/%7Ensarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB132/tapes.htm) confirming that American ships were never attacked and the incident was manufactured in order to provide the entree to the Vietnam war. This was particularly unpalatable for Ventura because he joined as a Navy Seal on September 11 1969, fought in Vietnam and lost many friends there.
Ventura asked that if the U.S. government were prepared to stage such a gargantuan historical event in terms of its significance in leading a nation to war then, why they would they refrain from doing so again today?
Ventura also highlighted 9/11 itself in contrasting the lax response of NORAD air defense to the four commercial airliners on 9/11 compared with the immediate interception of golfer Payne Stewart's Lear Jet (http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?id=1521846767-4906) in October 1999.
Ventura said that the argument that Americans should give up liberty in exchange for security in the war on terror was horrible and that government should never be trusted. He encouraged Americans to be skeptical of anything the government claims in light of their past duplicity.
Ventura seemed visibly upset during the interview, calling the American public apathetic, seemingly wanting to say more, and was very cynical that any real investigation would take place having already witnessed the 9/11 Commission's whitewash.
Ventura had previously aired his skepticism (http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2005/010705venturatroubled.htm) of the official version of events on Jay Leno and elaborated on a 2004 radio show but the former Governor went further than ever before during this interview.
Clips of the interview will be posted tonight and tomorrow for free. Watch this space.