NEW WORLD ORDER....

[Pennyworth]

John Lennon was assassinated on Jim Morrison's birthday...Dec 8.

[Pennyworth]

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl? ... 08/1421215

[Pennyworth]

Interesting and Curious...I went to the Bookstore last night. I came upon a book entitled 'John Lennon, The New York Years',Texts and Images..Bob Gruen @2005. The book is mainly a picture book with some commentary. On page 15 there is a picture of John Lennon and Yoko Ono. John is wearing a beret with a metal button pin on it. The button pin reads "Indict Rockefeller for Murder." The word 'Attica' is also on the button. _________________PP Posted: Fri Jul 28, 2006 2:17 am Attica and more...It's Nelson Rockefeller's Party Listen here: I am presuming here to dispute a neglected question with William F. Buckley: whose GOP is this, anyway, gathered in convention at Madison Square Garden? Bill Buckley has been a writer and a player to be reckoned with in the Republican tong wars going back to Robert "Mr. Republican" Taft vs. Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1952. He stood with Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan in battle with the Rockefeller faction of the party through the 1970s. So I asked him: How did the famously divided Republicans--Russell Baker once described them as a bird that was "all wings, and no body"--come to a simulation of unity behind George W. Bush? And just which tree do President Bush and this convention fall out of? Listen for yourself and judge whether Bill Buckley's tone suggests triumph or disappointment in his heart of hearts. "It falls," he responds to my question, "in the line of a Republican Party not fraught by any serious internal division, or even tension. It's not Rockefeller vs. Goldwater or Reagan vs. Rockefeller. It is more or less: 'whose turn is it?' And in that sense it represents a party that really hasn't found any missionary excitement of the kind that identifies the leader with a body of thought that's either gestating or received as common wisdom. "In other words, I think that the Republican nominee of four years ago and this year is not an exciting ideological figure. He is rather a senior figure who prevailed in traditional ways. I don't think Mr. Bush will be thought of as a Reagan or a Senator Taft." That is not just putting it mildly, I reply, it's getting it wrong. I volunteer to Bill Buckley that it seems clear in hindsight that the old casting of Rockefeller "moderates" and Reaganite "extremists" in the Republican party was a basic misconstruction, aided in no small part by the Rockefeller clout in the media and at the New York Times in particular. In real life we got to know Ronald Reagan as rather a gentle and available Main St. cowboy, a populist for the well-to-do, a phlegmatic character with quasi-isolationist "fortress America" instincts. He was open and clear about his anti-Communist foreign policy. Yes, he was a sneaky bully in Central America, but he was extremely cautious in action otherwise. It's the Rockefeller instincts I never stop worrying about. Drawing on the power of oil and Wall Street with the personal entitlement that comes of almost infinite inherited wealth, the Rockefeller instincts are compounded with secrecy, overfamiliarity with nuclear weapons and the CIA, and a possessive outlook on the whole world. It's the Rockefeller instincts, I argue, that led the bungling Bush administration into Iraq and fed the fantasy of an easy police action in a far outpost of empire. It's the old Rockefeller instincts that are still trying to euphemize and legitimize aggressive blunders that Ronald Reagan would never have committed. Ronald Reagan's "victory" in the Cold War and his emergence as a hero in Russia and Eastern Europe doubtless inspired George Bush's crazy dream of being seen someday as the "liberator" of Arab Muslims. But Bush missed the point by a mile. Ronald Reagan never bombed Warsaw or Petersburg or Moscow. He'd have lost the Cold War if he had. And he would surely have cautioned George Bush: Well, son...you won't win anything of value, even against Saddam Hussein, by bombing the Cradle of Civilization. I had my own odd epiphany about Ronald Reagan around the time of the Soviet assault on Afghanistan and the Iran hostage crisis in 1979, at the start of the 1980 presidential campaign. Jimmy Carter's national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, a longtime Rockefeller protege, had posed with a rifle in the Khyber Pass, in effect warning the Russians not even to think about approaching the Persian Gulf. Other old Rockefeller hands, notably Henry Kissinger and James Schlesinger, were muttering hints at the same time that the United States might have to use to nuclear weapons to defend our oil lifeline. But Ronald Reagan had an altogether different and explicitly anti-nuclear line. We might have to quarantine Cuba in response to a Russian mischief in the Gulf, Reagan said. But wasn't it wonderful, he added, that we had more oil under Alaska than existed in all of the Middle East! Reagan was being his fanciful Hollywood self, of course, about that Alaskan oil, but he was also revealing his continental and defensive reflexes about American power, altogether different from Nelson Rockefeller's. A Bill Buckley anecdote confirms my sentimental weakness for the late Ronnie as a crypto-peacenik: Colin Powell remarked not long ago, Buckley says, that "of all the people he ever worked with, he never ran into anybody who despised nuclear weapons the way Ronald Reagan did." I am remembering another epiphany as a New York Times reporter watching Nelson Rockefeller at a bizarre moment in 1976. He was a lame-duck vice president, having been chosen by the accidental President Gerald Ford, then dumped as a running mate in favor of Bob Dole. Late in the 1976 campaign, it was Rockefeller's awkward and humilitating duty to show Dole around New York State. On a state university campus in Westchester County, students turned out en masse, not to cheer Nelson Rockefeller but to remind the world of his role as governor in the Attica prison massacre in 1971. "Attica, Attica, no matter how you figger, Rocky pulled the trigger," the students kept chanting, drowning out host Rockefeller and his guest Dole. Finally Rocky, at the end of his rope, gave the kids the finger--first one hand, then two. I called the Times desk in some amazement to say that Nelson Rockefeller was melting down before scores of cameras. But this was a picture that was never to run in the New York Times, and a story not quite fit to be printed in the paper of record. Not about Nelson Rockefeller anyway. Rockefeller had power beyond imagining. His sway at Times was the least of it, perhaps, but we felt the vibrations, often with a chill of embarrassment. On Rockefeller's sudden death in his midtown Manhattan apartment in 1979, the marvellous James Reston reduced himself to writing in a page-one obituary appreciation that it was fitting that his friend had died in quiet contemplation of his personal art collection, though it soon developed that in fact Rocky had his fatal heart attack in the saddle with a girlfriend. A great ex-Times reporter, Richard Reeves, tells of a time in the late 1960s when New York was ablaze with race riots and Governor Rockefeller was missing for weeks. Reeves finally located him on World Bank president Eugene Black's island estate in the Mediterranean, whereupon Black, a member of the Times board, called the Times publisher to say: Governor Rockefeller was not to be disturbed! For the Times I covered Rockefeller's elevation to the vice presidency in 1974. Dick Reeves' joke at the time was: "Chris, don't worry about 'confict of interest' issues--Rocky's putting Venezuela into a blind trust." I feel a resonance of that ancient history inside this tight little Bush bubble of a convention in the militarized bunker of Madison Square Garden. The atmosphere in New York feels to me Rockefellerish, in a word. It's not so much that, as Kevin Phillips has written, "The Bushes' ties to John D. Rockefeller and Standard Oil go back 100 years." It is rather the impenetrable and impervious arrogance of Bush power. (Kevin Phillips again, on the Bushes: "I get a sense... that this is not a family that has a particularly strong commitment to American democracy. Its sense of how to win elections comes out of a CIA manual, not out of the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution.") It is also the deep insulation that most of the institutional media have given President Bush and his runaway misadventure in Iraq. It's just a few Republican veterans who say incisively what has happened to their party. Ron Reagan Jr., for one, in Esquire: "Spin has long been the lingua franca of the political realm. But George W. Bush and his administration have taken "normal" mendacity to a startling new level far beyond lies of convenience. On top of the usual massaging of public perception, they traffic in big lies, indulge in any number of symptomatic small lies, and, ultimately, have come to embody dishonesty itself. They are a lie. And people, finally, have started catching on... My father, acting roles excepted, never pretended to be anyone but himself. His Republican party, furthermore, seems a far cry from the current model, with its cringing obeisance to the religious Right and its kill-anything-that-moves attack instincts. ...Beyond issues of fiscal irresponsibility and ill-advised militarism, there is a question of trust. George W. Bush and his allies don't trust you and me. Why on earth, then, should we trust them?" Kevin Phillips, for another: "as far as I'm concerned, what the Bushes represent is just totally at loggerheads with everything from Abraham Lincoln down to McKinley and Teddy Roosevelt, to Eisenhower who warned about the military-industrial complex." And, clearest of all Pat Buchanan: “Under the rubric of conservatism, the Republican party of Bush I and II has been reinventing itself into what conservatives would have once recognized as a Rockefeller party reciting Reaganite rhetoric.â€

[Pennyworth]

BBC ON THIS DAY | 30 | 1981: President Reagan is shotThe assassination attempt has sent shock waves around the country where memories of the murder of president John F Kennedy remain vivid. President Reagan ...
news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/march/30/newsid_2530000/2530913.stm - 30k - Cached - Similar pages


Ronald Reagan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaPresident Reagan was criticized for the slow response of his Administration and other ... Assassination attempt. Main article: Reagan assassination attempt ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Reagan - 238k - Cached - Similar pages


Reagan assassination attempt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaUnedited footage of assassination attempt on Reagan · CNN interrupts normal programming to report attempted assassination of President Reagan. (Quicktime) ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reagan_assassination_attempt - 35k - Cached - Similar pages


Video clip of John Hinckley's attempted assassination of Ronald ...Video clip showing shots and aftermath of assassination attempt by John ... Reagan waves to the crowd. A voice yells, "President Reagan, President Reagan! ...
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/project ... yvideo.htm - 4k - Cached - Similar pages


Ronald Reagan... Assassination AttemptOn several previous occasions when I'd been out in public as president, the Secret Service ... D-Day, The Challenger, Nancy Reagan, Presidential Tradition ...
www.ronaldreagan.com/march30.html - 28k - Cached - Similar pages


President Ronald Reagan Assassination Attempt - John Hinckley FBI ...Access to thousands of pages of once secret historical documents, recordings, photos, video and audio.
http://www.paperlessarchives.com/reagan ... tempt.html - 15k - Cached - Similar pages


CNN Transcript - Larry King Live: Remembering the Assassination ...Remembering the Assassination Attempt on Ronald Reagan ... Rick Ahearn, was special assistant to President Reagan at the time of the shooting, ...
transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0103/30/lkl.00.html - 82k - Cached - Similar pages


The American Experience | Reagan | People & Events | John Hinckley Jr.The assassination attempt won him notoriety and media attention, ... Twelve years and two administrations later, President Clinton signed the Brady Bill, ...
www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/reagan/peopleevents/pande02.html - 16k - Cached - Similar pages


Reagan Assassination Attempt ~ Neil Bush and John Hinkley's ...The parents of John W. Hinckley Jr., "just destroyed" by their son's alleged assassination attempt on President Reagan, hope to see him "as soon as ...
www.hereinreality.com/hinckley.html - 42k - Cached - Similar pages


Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, National Archives and Records ...C1426-17, Chaos outside the Washington Hilton Hotel after the assassination attempt on President Reagan. James Brady and police officer Thomas Delahanty lie ...
http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/p ... assin.html - 22k - Cached - Similar pages

[Pennyworth]

http://www.etherzone.com/2006/stang080406.shtml

[Pennyworth]

http://www.worldcantwait.net/index.php? ... Itemid=223

[Pennyworth]

[Pennyworth]

[quote="Paul Pennyworth"][/quote]

http://www.worldcantwait.net/index.php? ... Itemid=239

[Pennyworth]

Guilt: An Interview with DVD Producer Don PaulToward Freedom, VT - Oct 18, 2006... five individuals as deserving of further investigation by a Grand Jury: Larry Silverstein, Peter G. Peterson, David Rockefeller, Dick Cheney and George W. Bush ...9/11 Guilt: An Interview with DVD Producer Don Paul Written by Bob Feldman Wednesday, 18 October 2006 Toward Freedom interviewed Don Paul, the author of 9/11: Facing The Fascist State and the 2005 book To Prevent Another 9/11, about his recently produced DVD, 9/11 Guilt: The Proof Is In Your Hands. TOWARD FREEDOM [TF]: Five years after the September 11, 2001 collapse of the World Trade Center buildings, there have been a lot of DVDs and movies about the 9/11 events produced. How is the DVD that you and Jim Hoffman produced similar to or different from the other 9/11-related DVDs and movies? DON PAUL [DP]: Well, the only DVDs that I've seen are the second edition of Loose Change, one of David Ray Griffin's talks, and one of Steven Jones' and Kevin Jones' recent talks about some of the physical evidence which shows that three World Trade Center buildings were brought down by controlled demolition. I've seen only those three DVDs about 9/11. I would say that Jim's and my DVD, 9/11 Guilt: The Proof Is In Your Hands, is distinguished by the concision of the physical evidence that Jim presents. His part of the DVD is titled 'Proving Controlled Demolition of World Trade Center Building 7 and the Twin Towers.' In the last ten or so minutes of his presentation Jim offers more than five "features" and then five "proofs" of demolition--along with some very pointed graphics. He shows beyond question, I think, that all three Buildings were taken down by different methods of controlled demolition. The Twin Towers were exploded as no buildings have been before or since and about seven hours later World Trade Center Building 7 was imploded in a classic, conventional demolition. Another distinction of our DVD, I think, is that we get into the who and why of the crimes.Both our presentations were recorded to be played at the second convening of the Los Angeles Citizens' Grand Jury on the Crimes of September 11, 2001. My presentation is called "Indicting the Financiers Behind the Crimes of September 11, 2001." I name five individuals as deserving of further investigation by a Grand Jury: Larry Silverstein, Peter G. Peterson, David Rockefeller, Dick Cheney and George W. Bush. Larry Silverstein is the developer of World Trade Center Building 7, completed in 1986, and the head of a group that took over the lease to the Twin Towers and much other World Trade Center property from the New York Port Authority just seven weeks before September 11, 2001.Why should a Grand Jury indict Larry Silverstein? One reason would be to find out exactly why he said on PBS, on national TV, in September of 2002 that he and a New York City Fire Department chief had decided in the late afternoon of 9/11/01 about WTC 7 that they should "pull it"--"pull it" meaning that this 47-story skyscraper should be demolished--though WTC had not been hit by either aircraft or much debris and showed only small fires in that late afternoon, seven hours after the second Twin Tower went down. WTC 7, 590 feet tall, fell is less than seven seconds, imploding straight-down into its own footprint. Jim's website, http://www.wtc7.net, has excellent footage of this implosion. In February 2002 Silverstein and WTC 7's lease-holders (the Blackstone Group, Banc of America Securities, and the General Motors Acceptance Corporation) were awarded an insurance pay-out of $861 million, about $475 million more than the total investment in WTC 7 before the building's demolition.My presentation reports from the website of Controlled Demolition, Inc. about the amount of time that preparations for implosion of a building the size of WTC 7 would require. It took 24 days to simply place the charges that took down the 35-story J. L. Hudson building in Detroit in 1998. So weeks of planning and placement must have preceded the obvious demolition of WTC 7 on September 11, 2001.On 9/11 Peter G. Peterson was Chairman of the Blackstone Group, an investment-banking firm that was one of WTC 7's leaseholders along with Banc of American Securities and the General Motors Acceptance Corporation. I say in 9/11 Guilt that Peter G.Peterson should be indicted because leaseholders of a property as valuable of WTC 7 should be responsible for foreknowledge of the lengthy preparations to demolish it.I say also that Peterson and David Rockefeller should be investigated for their larger roles in a financial establishment whose irrational, destructive, debt-driven needs make crimes such as 9/11 inevitable. On September 11, 2001 Peter G. Peterson was also Chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations and Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.Toward Freedom's readers should check out, if they haven't already, what the C F R and the Federal Reserve System are truly doing to the possibilities for liberty in our country and the world. David Rockefeller, a former Chairman of the Chase Bank and the Chairman for 15 years of the C F R, was the individual most responsible for construction of the World Trade Center and especially the Twin Towers. He and his brother controlled the New York Port Authority in the 1960s and 1970s and allies of the Rockefeller family controlled the New York Port Authority at the time in 2001 of the N Y P A's transfer to Larry Silverstein and his partners of a 99-year-lease for the Twin Towers and other WTC properties.9/11 Guilt also notes that the Twin Towers were obsolescent "white elephants", laden with asbestos and needing hundreds of millions of dollars in modernization, worth more in insurance pay-outs if demolished than if they'd stood. In sum, I think it would be very healthy and useful to our society for David Rockefeller and Peter G. Peterson to be questioned by a Grand Jury. Dick Cheney and George W. Bush, whose roles in our economy and society are perhaps less consequential, already are subject to some scrutiny by the public in this society.Another part of 9/11 Guilt examines how much the invasion of Afghanistan that followed the crimes of September 11, 2001 increased the opium crop there--a 2000% increase in 2002--and how much this Afghan opium crop means to the world's illegal economy (about $180 billion when 3500 metric tons of opium are turned into street-corner heroin) and the world's legal economy (about $3.6 trillion when that $180 billion is laundered into Stock Markets and processed through institutions such as the Chase Bank). The DVD's other main creator, Celestine Star, did an excellent job with graphics in this part. These are some of the elements in "9/11 Guilt" that I think may be special to it. TF: Now, if there was an economic motivation on the part of Silverstein and Rockefeller to bring down the "white elephants", why didn't they just bring it down at night, when there weren't any people involved? Why turn it into a mass-casualty thing? DP: Because another large part of the intention of the acts committed in Lower Manhattan on 9/11/01 was to traumatize the world's populace and especially the U. S. public. The populace was meant to receive a series of blows and that delivery of psychological trauma couldn't have been accomplished if the crashes and Twin Tower demolitions happened at night.If you look at the amount of casualties from the Twin Towers, it's remarkably low, given what they might have been. I know when I watched the collapse, I was thinking that thirty thousand--fifty thousand--people had perished. Because TV commentary was saying over and over that was the normal workday population of the Twin Towers. Fatalities were minimized not for any humane reason, I think, but to reduce the number of victims' intimates who might be suspicious afterward.At the same time, the suddenness and violence and scale of the Twin Towers' collapses (more explosions and disintegrations, really, than collapses) had to be overwhelming so that we, the public, would be more or less incapable of considering what we were seeing. As others have observed, 9/11 was the biggest psychological operation, or "psy-op", in history.The number of fatalities in New York City on 9/11/01 is close to the number of deaths at Pearl Harbor in December 1941, another instance of a U. S. administration facilitating an attack that killed thousands. The spectacular attack on "9/11" was the 'new Pearl Harbor' wanted by Zbignew Brzezinski in The Grand Chessboard, 1997, and by the "neo-cons" of the Project for a New American Century in their year 2000 paper to outrage the U. S. public into backing invasions of Central Asia and the Middle East.TF: Now, could you recap what your current explanation is for the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings on 9/11/01? The Federal Emergency Management Agency, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the 9/11 Commission Report, and the U. S. State Department have all issued explanations that say the Twin Towers came down due to airliners' impacts and the subsequent fires (though they say little or nothing about WTC 7). DP: I think three kinds of explosives were used to bring down the Twin Towers. I think that RDX-shaped charges, more conventional explosives, were used to cut some beams due to the predictable precision of these charges. I think that more powerful, thermite-laced charges were used to cut through each Tower's 47 central steel columns at crucial junctures--Steven Jones' has an excellent lecture about this likelihood in print, online and on DVD. I think that by far the greatest destruction of each Tower was accomplished through thermobaric weapons placed in the buildings' freight-elevator shafts. A thermobaric weapon shoots an aerosol spray that's then ignited by a charge so its explosiveness is multiplied in outward waves--a lot more powerful than conventional, commercial explosives. If you look at footage of the fall of each Tower--footage that's available on many sites online-you can see several phenomena that can't be explained by the building's potential gravitational energy. The acronym of E. P. V. S. S. helps to break down the phenomena that you can see. E for Explosiveness--the instantaneous, violent, horizontal thrust of matter at the very start of each Tower's destruction. P for Pulverization--90,000 tons of concrete slabs in each Tower blown to 100-micron particles instantaneously. V for Velocity--steel beams shot sideways as far as 500 feet at 100-feet-per-second early in each Tower's fall. One S for Speed--the rate at which the Towers fell, a rate close to free-fall, a rate identical for both matter falling through the footprint area of those 47 central steel columns and falling through the air outside each Tower's footprint area. And the last S for Symmetry--each Tower plummeting straight-down like a disintegrating elevator instead of toppling as dozens of other skyscrapers have in earthquakes.These obvious phenomena--and several more that Jim details in his presentation--are there for anyone to see if look objectively. The Towers were demolished. Mass murder in a series of psychological shocks was executed on 9/11/01. And the demolition of WTC 7 is even more obvious for anyone who cares to study footage of that building's inward fall.TF: O.K. Now what about the Pentagon? Based on your investigation, what caused that destruction of that side of the Pentagon?DP: Well, it was certainly not an aircraft that could have been flown by the Official Story's purported pilot of it, Hani Hanjour. Nor, I think, could whatever aircraft that struck the Pentagon's west wedge have been flown by any human pilot aboard it, based on what I hear from commercial airline pilots and former military pilots, given this aircraft's maneuvers of descending 7,000 feet in 2 1/2 minutes and executing a 270-degree turn in that span of space and time.We that there's a lot of dispute and furor over whether or not a Boeing 757-200--that is American Airlines Flight 77--was the aircraft that hit the Pentagon. To me, this uncertainty--an uncertainty that's been enhanced by more or less self-incriminating evidence released by the U. S. Government from its load of confiscated video-tape--doesn't matter. It doesn't matter as to the culpability of the perpetrators. We know from other indisputable facts there that there had to be a U. S. military stand-down which allowed the Pentagon to be struck by an aircraft 34 minutes after the second Tower was hit and that this aircraft must had computerized and/or remote piloting in order to execute the maneuvers to brought it to impact with the Pentagon. Neither the stand-down nor the computerized and/or remote piloting could have been done by Al Queda.TF: What about the fourth plane that went down in Pennsylvania or it disappeared in Western Pennsylvania? What happened there? What's your sense of what happened? DP: I'm certain that this aircraft was United Airlines Flight 93 and that it was shot down by U.S. military, shot down because passengers aboard it were on the verge of gaining control of the aircraft. The aircraft left an 8-mile range of debris and a one-ton piece of one engine was found 2000 yards away from the aircraft's main impact-zone--signs that it was shot apart in mid-air. Jim's 911research.wtc7.net site has an excellent summary and good aerial photos. TF: Why do you think the Kean Commission's official story of what happened on September 11, 2001 is not accepted by most people in the United States and around the globe these days? DP: Well, because we still can see straight. Because we're still a people capable of recognizing that explosions are not collapses and that emperors--or more precisely would-be dictators, per George W. Bush's wish in December 2000 that he could be dictator of the U. S.--are not wearing clothes--or more precisely that certain un-elected officials are not fit to wear the gear they sometimes put on. The 9/11 Commission Report is another great lie or complex or interdependent but ill-fitting lies, and more and more people are seeing through it. By "most people" I think you mean the polls last Spring which showed, you know, that 83% of us believe along with Charley Sheen that there has been a cover-up of the crimes of 9/11/01. And another poll, run by the Washington Post just after it published a lengthy piece by Michael Powell around September 8 of this year. That poll asked: 'Do you believe any of the conspiracy theories suggesting the U. S. government was somehow involved in 9/11?' Out of 64,000-some respondents, 59% answered: 'Yes. The government has left many questions unanswered about that day.' The public's avowed doubts are proof that the Corporate Government's "psy-op" is not working, five years on. Now we have the courage to carry our astute perceptions into action.TF: Who are the individuals who should be held accountable for the collapse of the World Trade Center? DP: Well, I've named the five for whom indictments are sought in the 9/11 Guilt presentation--Rockefeller, Peterson, Silverstein, Cheney and Bush. Indubitable criminals all, acting against our society's well-being long before 9/11/01, I think. In the past year more has come to light about individuals who might be questioned on the operational level about the World Trade Center demolitions--individuals who were far inside planning of mock terrorist incidents or far inside 'security' for the WTC and for crucial Airports. Readers of Toward Freedom might want to do Internet seaches on L. Paul Bremer, Jerome Hauer, Marvin Bush, Wirt Walker and Michael Cherkasy. But the real culprit behind the crimes of 9/11 and the pretexts that these terrible crimes provided is the economic system that holds us in thrall and that makes such crimes (there like repeated in Madrid on 2/11/04, in London on 7/7/05, and elsewhere on other dates since 9/11/01 to perpetuate the " 'War on Terrorism' " and increase State repression) inevitable.In Jim's and my 2004 book Waking Up from Our Nightmare I use another acronym, G. O. D. D., to sum up the four main working-parts of this system that holds us in literal bondage. G for Guns--armaments and all the business of wars. O for Oil--obvious in Central Asia and the Middle East. D for Drugs--also obvious, once you know the billions unto trillions of dollars that are reaped annually from Afghan opium and Andean coca. And D for Debt--the greatest instrument, I think, of bondage and fear that Banks' and other financial institutions' amazing global empire wields.It's Banks' own colossal debts that leave them no alternative to "their destructive, irrational system" but acts of terror and subsequent wars to keep their more and more abstract machinery going. They're combining 'derivatives' now. It's their pride or hypocrisy that lets them justify their catastrophe-making exploitativeness under guises such as 'Strategic Adjustment Programs'. It's the hubris behind concepts such as a 'New World Order.'And I have to say that we ourselves are accomplices as well as victims of this G. O. D. D. system. It's up to us to show what we know and a force a turn from this system before we lose the "hundreds of thousands of lives" that Dick Cheney promises us could be lost "as the result of a single attack, or a set of coordinated attacks."TF: Some people might say "Well, just like after WWII, you had the Nuremburg Trials. Put the officials of the U.S. government in the docket for 9/11." It sounds like you're saying it's deeper than that: "It's the System." And you wouldn't necessarily think it would be a valid option to go after the individual officeholders? DP: Well, Nuremburg itself was a show trial because it didn't reveal the thoroughgoing involvement of U.S. and British corporations in Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy. You know there could not have been a rise of Adolf Hitler without the support of George W. Bush's grandfather, Prescott Bush, a Republican who later became Senator from Connecticut, and Prescott Bush's partner in the Brown Brothers Harriman investment-banking firm, W. Averell Harriman, a Democrat who later became Governor of New York. These bankers, brothers in Yale University's secret-society of Skull and Bones (George W. Bush and John Kerry are brothers in the same secret-society) co-owned a mine in Poland that employed labor from Auschwitz into 1942. Nazi Germany's Wehrmacht could not have fought into 1944 without parts from Ford, General Motors and I.T.T. and oil from Standard Oil. Charles Higham's Trading with the Enemy is a good reference on these dealings.So I think that putting Dick Cheney on trial won't really get us out of the deeper crises we're in. Certainly we need to expose more to public scrutiny. Certainly the public needs to register what a predicament the Western world and our entire species is in. We need to feel how ravaged and threatened freedoms are in the United States since 9/11.The last little book I did, To Prevent the Next " '9/11' " / Abandoning the 'New World Order' of Financiers' Corporate State, notes that three officials from the Soviet Union's KGB,, Yevgeny Primakov, Alexander Karpov and Oleg Kalugin, are now executives in the U. S. Department of Homeland Security and Markus Wolf, former head of East Germany's STASI, now heads surveillance for Homeland Security.The To Prevent ... book also notes particulars of repressive legislation that has passed in the U. S. since 9/11--particulars in the Homeland Security Bill and the Patriot Act of 2001 and the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of late 2004. It quotes the speech by Dick Cheney to the World Affairs Council in January 2004 that I cited a little earlier, the one in which the former Halliburton CEO warns about the potential use of biological, chemical and "even nuclear weapons" by terrorists: "Instead of losing thousands of lives, we might lose tens or even hundreds of thousands of lives as the result of a single attack, or a set of coordinated attacks."And it notes that--according to the New York Post--on the night after Cheney's speech in Los Angeles a meeting was held in the New York City apartment of media-advisor Steven Brill between the then head of Homeland Security, Tom Ridge, and the heads of the News departments of CBS, ABC, FOX CNN, and Network anchors Aaron Brown, Tom Brokaw and Peter Jennings, 'to discuss how to handle the next terrorist attack.'Now, this very week in early October 2006, a few factors point to much broader U. S./British/Canadian war in the Middle East and further State repression. The Military Commissions Act of 2006 recently sailed through the House and Senate of the U. S. This Act lets the U. S. President declare anyone an 'unlawful enemy combatant' and imprison that person--perhaps imprison him or her in one of the huge detention-centers that Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown and Root is building with the $385 million awarded it last January. Readers can check out Marjorie Cohn's recent article for more information.At the same time naval and land forces are massing near the borders of Syria and Iran. A pretty detailed overview of this build-up is up on the http://www.globalresearch.ca site that Michel Chossudovsky edits. This site will also show readers that the 2006 Afghan opium crop has increased about 50% above recent years' crops--and about 3000% above the last year, 2001, that the Taliban governed Afghanistan.So we, the majority of the U.S. and Western world who now suspect that the crimes of 9/11/01 were an inside-job, that these crimes were mass murder meant to provoke endless war, crimes that could have been accomplished only by those with approved access to the Twin Towers' central steel columns, need to make our knowledge visible. We need to choose a day for a mass demonstration--or nationwide teach-ins. Basically we need to show the mass-murderers that their standard-operating-procedure of false-flag terror won't work anymore. We've gained a lot in terms of a skeptical, aware public in the three years. We have a lot more to win.TF: How can people obtain a copy of your new DVD? DP: Well, the easiest way for most Internet-empowered folks is through http://www.wireonfire.com/donpaul . Jim's http://www.wtc7.net also offers 9/11 Guilt and other material for sale. And I'd like to make this new offer to better spread the word. Students or anyone who considers himself or herself a low-income person can have the DVD for $12, shipping included, by writing to me at POB 74-1365, New Orleans, LA 70114. The DVD can be had from us at $10 per copy for purchases of 20 or more, $8 per copy for 50 or more, and $6 per copy for 100 or more. Jim and/or I are happy to travel for public showings. Please visit his sites for more extensive information. Let's do all we can to spread the word, as said, and prevent that next "attack."

[Pennyworth]

technical problem here.