Saturday, January 30, 2010

Pearl Harbour, 9/11, and Craig Murray's Mental Horse

Poor old Craig Murray. It seems his mental horse still shies at the 911 hurdle. Says he, there would have been too many people involved and someone would have objected. The following is the comment I would have posted there if it wasn't for the fact that, a) it's too long and, b) I was too late to the party, and c) his comments section is now perfectly infested with sundry full-time professional shills who, as Craig himself recently said, spend more time at his blog than he does.

Hullo Craig,

How dreary this discussion is - all bogged down in its various (and alleged) building and demolition experts. "It'd take months and dozens of men. Either that or one good bang and a kerosene fire." God spare me. May I just step back and go big picture? Or 'big documentary' perhaps. Have you seen the BBC documentary Sacrifice At Pearl Harbour? You really must - it's at googlevideo.

In it, by way of testimonies from various participants (English, Dutch, Australian, American: signals corp, foreign service etc) it's made unarguably clear that there was pretty much nothing about the Japanese attack at Pearl Harbour that the Americans weren't fully aware of. The closer the Japanese came, the more precise the details, until eventually Roosevelt would have been impatiently looking at his watch. The only two people not in the loop were Short and Kimmel, the respective army and navy commanders of Pearl Harbour, and upon whom the whole thing was blamed.

It's a cold hard truth that Roosevelt wanted the US in the war and Pearl Harbour was the means he used to achieve this. And sure, he sacrificed a couple thousand of his own people. No big deal - I doubt anyone in Washington would have batted an eyelid. They wanted a war, and in a war sacrificing people - in large numbers - is just part of the game. It's done all the time. Mind you, what you don't do is sacrifice expensive hardware. That's why Pearl Harbour was full of WWI vintage ships and all the shiny new vessels were out to sea.

Okay, so what's that you say about 911? ...too many people involved and someone would have objected? Can I put it to you that it doesn't make any difference? In Sacrifice At Pearl Harbour the too-many-people who were involved are interviewed one after the other. And? And nothing. Hell, do an ask-around at the office and see if anyone is aware that Pearl Harbour was bullshit. Never mind that, the conversation in your comments here is proof in itself. It's yet another tiresome to-and-fro that refuses to acknowledge that the US government has previously used a fake event involving the sacrifice of thousands of its own citizens to gin up a war. And lots of people were involved, they did tell their story, and nothing happened.

Since the media has, to a man, chosen to ignore this fact (much like they chose to ignore the most famous weapons inspector in the world, Scott Ritter, when he declared that there were no WMD's in Iraq) we end up in a nonsensical conversation with its foundation consisting of 'that could never happen and they could never do it'. But it did happen. They have done it. And not in isolation neither. Fast forward to the Lavon Affair of 1954, the Gulf of Tonkin 1964, the USS Liberty 1967, and lo-and-behold 'it could never happen' starts to look, I don't know... perverse? Jump then to the year 2000 and we have the super-heavy neocon PNAC mob banging the table demanding war in the Middle East and dreamily hoping for "some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor". And their wish came true! "Gosh, I'm the luckiest girl in the world!" says they, with a glycerine tear in their eye.

And here we are nine years later Craig, with absolutely overwhelming evidence from thousands of sources and you still can't get your head around the thought that 911 might have been faked. Here's a question for you - What would it take? What would it take to get you there? It seems vaporised steel and molten concrete won't do it. Certainly not traces of thermate. Nor will: the whisking away of evidential rubble; the failure/disappearance of security footage; the fact that the Muslim extremist pilots ate pork, drank alcohol, and cavorted with hookers, (and they couldn't fly); the hundreds of witnesses who testified to multiple/sequential explosions "boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, all the way down like a controlled demolition!"; the fact that Bush mis-remembered his 911 moment and reminisced about watching the first plane crash on live TV (three times! in public!) - none of this will get you to even consider that anyone other than a bunch of Muslims might have been interested in making 911 happen.

I'll read your mind Craig - I'll tell you what would get you there: If the whole thing was on the telly and was given the imprimatur of talking heads. I'll bet money that that would make a believer of you. Unless the media says it's so it may as well have never happened. This is in spite of the fact that the media has shown over and over again how perfectly crooked it is. Not a single soul was allowed to contradict the WMD's in Iraq story - everyone sang from the same songbook, all in perfect harmony. Impossibly, the media's first and only name in their WMD rolodex, Scott Ritter, was nowhere to be seen. I'll say it again - Ritter's global media absence in 2003 could not possibly have been an accident. He was off-message and so he was off-media: the entire media, all of it.

And travelling back now - the USS Liberty, the Gulf of Tonkin, the Lavon Affair, Pearl Harbour, none of them ever happened in the media, not beyond their sing-from-the-same-songsheet bullshit spin. But they did happen. Ask the crew of the Liberty: threatened with death, ignored by history, and now they're furious beyond all consolation. Pinchas Lavon is dead, but the Egyptian Jews who set the bombs are still alive and were all given medals recently. What's Hebrew for hip hip hooray? Kimmel and Short went to their graves with neither of them earning a rehabilitation, but never mind, shit happens.

Except the media. There, shit does not happen. There, when faced with the media's unasked question 'Who are you going to believe? Me? Or your lying eyes?' we all slide out of our seats, kiss the screen, and declare our fealty. Yeah, well fuck that. I refuse, and I'm only one of thousands upon thousands who've done the same. We know you're capable of better things Craig: you do know better. You know that they lie. En bloc! And they do it Big-Lie-style about the biggest story there is: the Bringing of War. They've done it before and they'll do it again. And again. And again. They'll keep doing it until the balance shifts and 75,000-hits-a-month heavies like yourself stand up and call it for what it is.

The media has even more invested in 911 than they do in global warming but as with global warming they can be shifted. Their hand can be forced. But it'll never happen if guys like you sit there telling yourself (and all to the applause of your barking seal full-timers) that 'it could never happen... they would never do it...'

Pearl Harbour was a lie and 911 was no different. Our rulers lie and they lie big, as big as Hitler. If you ain't prepared to say so, then you ain't good for much Craig. Whatever it is you're on about - torture, and memos thereof - you're just snipping around the edges.


nobody said...

PS And Craig, those full-timers who inhabit your comments section? The only way to get such tireless dedication to the defence of the status quo is by paying for it. Honestly, we've seen it all before. In the seventies it was called Operation Mockingbird. The Israeli version is called Megaphone. I don't know whose employees your blog has attracted but with 75,000 hits a month there's no way you'll be left alone. You're precisely who they're looking for. Subsequently, if there's people here who seem to be professional (at least by way of attendance) it's because they are professional.

Do you know what that means Craig? It means they're scared of you. Or perhaps more specifically of your commenters who (in compliment to yourself) have been some of the most interesting and erudite people around. God forbid they should be allowed to freely air their views to such a sizeable audience. The spooks know their shit and now the worthies, distracted and deterred by the nitpicking, baiting, and ad hominems, as well as the reduction of the conversation to lizards and Prince Philip, are staying away or getting lost in the shitstorm. And that's how the professional playbook works. If you can't win the argument you merely yell and scream, hog all the limelight, and reduce everything to irrelevancy. Sad really, but that's the lot of unmoderated comments in any blog with a large audience.

angrysoba said...

One question:

How did FDR arrange for Hitler to declare war on the US?

Also, that photograph of workers at Ground Zero presumably shows glowing molten metal, right?

Wrong. It is the light of a torch and I think it might be one of the pictures that Steven Jones touched up.

nobody said...

Bingo! Speak of the devil and he will appear. There's professionality for you. How many minutes did it take between me posting over at Craig's and you racing here to comment, angrysoba? Five? Hot diggety. Good thing you don't have to work for a living eh? Anyway I'm sure your masters will be pleased.

Just so you get it, this ain't like Craig's blog. I'm not shy when it comes to blitzing people. And you are the perfect candidate! My standard procedure is not to disappear you so much as explain to everyone what it is you've just said.

For instance this comment would have been described as 'angrysoba popped in making some spurious point about Hitler, in spite of me not having mentioned him in the article. The purpose was to trash the discussion and have us all arguing about whatever he thinks is important. Silly him.'

And it's possible that that is a torch but gee whiz it's a pretty picture ain't it? I could replace it with one of three other pix I have of unmistakably molten metal but who cares? Like I'm here to dance to your tune, ha ha.

Anyway it was lovely to have you pop in AS. Particularly after I'd just made the point about arseholes infesting Craig's blog. You didn't read it did you? Never mind. You made an arse of yourself and I had a laugh at your expense. Very good!

nobody said...

Oh! It's Saturday arvo and the library is closing. I'm outta here till Monday. Ciao regazzi.

And angrysoba between now and then I suspect you should easily be able to write at least a hundred comments. Knock yourself out.

angrysoba said...

So what you're saying is you don't particularly care if what you present as evidence is genuine or not?

Well, that's the Truther way, I suppose.

Craig said...

You got one thing wrong. If it was on television I would be still less likely to believe it :-)

Sabretache said...

Good stuff N.

Poor Dear Old Craig indeed. He's tasted the Establishment good life. Being cast adrift must be VERY hard to take and I don't envy him in his need to build an alternative career. He knows as well as anyone the price exacted by effectively challenging the REAL Western Establishment Power Structures and he's clearly not about to open a second front by going native over 911 and such - no matter what the evidence says. In a nutshell, it is near impossible to get any man to see something that his livelihood depends on his NOT seeing and Craig is clearly no exception. Or as that Old Paul Simon song has it "... still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest"

My guess is he will gradually acquiesce in his co-option and life will thus gradually become more comfortable etc etc as he continues to respect certain boundaries so-to-speak, his past (and present??) nuisance value notwithstanding. After all his principle issue is one which resonates with the public and which is therefore eminently co-optable with a bit of massaging, pious words and the passage of time. He's sending out the right signals for it and he is arguably too dangerous to be kept in the outer darkness. So, silence him or co-opt him; those are the two available options. My money goes on the latter - if only because suiciding and premature deaths have been just a tad overdone this past decade or so and have to be held somewhat in reserve for sudden unforeseen major threats like a Dr Kelly Mk2 or some such.

Hey ho.

Miraculix Augustus said...

The saddest bit of all is that only the narrowest segment of readers are even going to understand the "textbook" nature of what your new mate angrysoba was doing there.

It's a veritable case study in the very techniques you nail to Mr. Murray's door with such alacrity and clarity.

Best of all, he goes "all the way" on the first move, invoking the "Hitler Maneuver" and thereby rendering everything said after meaningless. Or so the theory has been fairly accurately described.

As for mine, I've nothing worth saying because it's already been toasted by sad sack -soba blowing his Nazi load all over your comments section. Was it really just five minutes?

Miraculous. What a coincidence that must be. I think I'll just concentrate of life and love and art and leave what little political activism once occupied my conscience and soul where it belongs -- in the dustbin with all those other co-opted intangibles like "peace", "freedom" and "independence".

Cheers for fighting the good fight Mr. N, you're got a stronger stomach than I for the vast s(t)inkhole that this subject has become since the advent of online programming to supplement the broadcast variety.

Now, I think I'll go write a haiku...

Kosta said...

No offence intended to anyone, but perhaps Craig Murray just thinks Americans are all stupid.
How else in his mind could a bunch of boys barely out of their teens, overcome the most advanced military and air defence systems in the world while being armed only with "box-cutters".

Thanks for the link to the Old Pearl Harbour.

Here is a better copy I've found in 7 parts for anyone interested.

Sacrifice at Pearl Harbor (Part 1 of 7)

Sacrifice at Pearl Harbor (Part 2 of 7)

Sacrifice at Pearl Harbor (Part 3 of 7)

Sacrifice at Pearl Harbor (Part 4 of 7)

Sacrifice at Pearl Harbor (Part 5 of 7)

Sacrifice at Pearl Harbor (Part 6 of 7)

Sacrifice at Pearl Harbor (Part 7 of 7)

kikz said...

thermal imaging... WTC

hey angrysob... sod off, wanker.

New York State, Office for Technology (c2001) and EarthData International.
Geography and Map Division

glenn said...

Like it - very well written. It deserves to go on the
record too, just post it in the one and only 911
thread we'll ever see at Murray's site.

frank verismo said...

In the opening months of 2004 I saw the collapse of WTC7 for the first time. I was aware of Thierry Meyssan's 'Pentagate' book, having glimpsed it in Waterstones, but was quite dismissive of such theories, preferring the 'blowback' idea still favoured by Craig. But WTC7s collapse stuck like a fishbone in my throat. I've been trying to dislodge that fishbone for 6 years now. I had genuinely hoped that the eventual NIST report would perform that task. If WTC7 can be explained, all the other elements can in all likelyhood, be similarly accounted for. Instead, the fishbone chafes more than ever.

I'll reiterate the simple point I made on Craig's blog, largely as no official story subscriber went near it:

If a building can collapse in the style of a textbook controlled demolition and yet not be the result of CD - why do NIST's models of the collapse mechanism bear no resemblance to the (multiple) videos of the actual collapse?

"It may look like a CD, but there's a better explanation" is the common refrain from NISTs subscribers. Okay - if that's the case, why can't they produce a model that at least bears a resemblance to the reality?

After 7 years and a more than ample budget, this is the reason why that fishbone is still stuck in the throats of millions. We were waiting for a Bentley - and they delivered a moped.

idiot savant said...

Ahhhh haaaaa, Señor Nadie, that was so good, and still is, getting better every minute. To think that you recommended Mr. Murray to me three months ago when I was inquiring about hangout-able places on the web. Now someone has to "take him behing the wood shed and execute" this piece of excrement (what a mess).

Like William Dean A. Garner put forth so succinctly here,

time is up and the fans are set to MAX. You are not going to walk away, José(s). You stay.

I can't help but feeling that it is exactly as intuited, people with half a brain don't suddenly have a quarter, they just pretend. Like him. What a wrong move to choose sides. Bad antennas, for sure. Really shitty intuition, integrity, timing - and style. That's the most unforgiveable. Craig Murray, you are a piecee of shit.

No nobody, I don't take the recommendation you made personal, because you put a caveat in there. We all wise up and get the drift (some don't). And reading his stuff did not do anything to reverse the impression that this is a glib but obvious bullshit artist. Skip the artist, replace with dispenser.

idiot savant

veritas6464 said...

Hey Nobody,..great piece, excellent: @angrysoba/crankynoodlesoup; eat me, you cannot possibly maintain your veiwpoint unless you are a shill. You are a shill, your Blg is a fucking waste of space as indicated by the number of followers - ZILCH! Ziowankers are a joke, no-one thinks you are valid or relevant. If truthers are a minority, shills are the bacteriophage that infests the bumff on a Truther! 911 was an Israhelli Job!

Nameste brother Nobody keep up the barrage, they'll break and fall to theirs kness begging for the mercy they have never given; again. Apocalypse is Now! 'Har Meggido' is near!

Nameste Nobody,


Anonymous said...


By the Lord Harry, Mr Nobody, what manner of sedition is this? If this sort of loose talk were to get abroad then where would we be Eh! I’ll tell you. People would loose confidence in their political system; they might even begin to think that their democratically elected leaders no longer represented their interests. And where would that lead to, my man! God forbid, people might even stop voting and then the likes of you will come along spreading falsehoods that incumbent politicians resort to inventing votes to hang onto power. That’s where it will lead! Tut, tut and shame on you Mr Nobody.

aferrismoon said...

Many people saw 'planes that on 9/11.

Many citizens reported that they 'saw' alien spacecraft when Orson Welles presented the 'War of the Worlds' psy-op.
After that , esp. using Television, the Media went into psy-op overdrive.
Welles later made 'F for Fake' just to remind us.


nobody said...

Hats off to all you fine people. And Craig! Lovely of you to have popped in even if it was only to say, "And now I must be off!" Never mind. And don't mind Idiot Savant, I'm sure if we were to have a quiet word with him he'd agree that it was poor of him to have gone that one step beyond the boundaries of politeness.

And Savant, honestly mate! One line too many -save the vitriol for the proper villains. Craig is hardly that. It's a fine line to tread but I'm sure you're capable of it. Yoroshiku!

And the silly soba couldn't help himself could he? Mate, you don't get it. In a moderated comments you won't win a trick. Techniques to have us chasing our tails are completely doomed here. Besides which, the provenance of that photo has nothing to do with the factuality of vaporised steel and molten concrete (and what that means) and you know it. Between Kikz and Mir, you may consider yourself dealt with. Feel free to skulk off.

Thanks PhoneyID for those links. I'm glad you did that since I was in half a mind to do it myself.

Otherwise Tache, Glenn, Frank, Veritas, FB, and Ferris, feel free to pop in here anytime and have a spray. I always groove on it.

Um... I hope I didn't leave anyone out.

kikz said...

savent... nodz on the nassim links..

was it you, who intro'd me to nassim over on les' blog?


his earlier presentations are tedious.. (could've just been i had to wait so long to hear 'bout the torus - i'd learned of it coupa yrs ago...)but by the godz enthusiastic! the later ones, much more polished and better visual aids:)

i don't necessarily agree w/his theories on et, but i do admire his sacred geometry, and scaled universal principles :)

if you like nassim, you might be interested in a slightly cross-disciplinary field/personality..

bruce lipton - epigenetics.. just search on youtube or googe :)
if i'm not completely bananas.. i think nassim may even mention bruce :)

heehee.. wv - nested :)

kikz said...

oh and ....

speaking of melting...

that huge horde of gold was never found.. nor mentioned again...

convenient eh?

nobody said...

Oh, and I meant to say (somewhat cryptically) Hey Sally, nice one.

Anyone who's interested might want to pop over to Sabretache's blog. It's always worth checking out but today's piece is utterly germane. When I mentioned the 'worthies' in Craig's comments section, it was Tache I had in mind, ha ha.

gallier2 said...

Boohoohoo, you forgot me on your list... Now I'm sad.

Miraculix Augustus said...

Cheers Mr. N, you do me great honor bookending me with Kikz at fullback. Your goal will be defended.

When the shills make a charge, we don't wave our hands at the officials waiting for an offsides flag, we just hack 'em hard across the intellectual shins and let the trainer sort out the misery... =)

Have you had to filter any additional fecal matter from your new online pal, or has Soba the Shill simply given up on us hopeless "Truthers"?

How laughable. I associate and/or ally myself with no movement. And what a great demonstration in the art of lazy textbook molework.

First post: The Nazi strategy. Decapitate the entire thread. Render all that follows essentially meaningless by invoking Hitler and FDR and a raging case of Hegelian Dialectic Rash.

Second post: Straight to the ad hominem with out so much as a "by your leave".

Funniest of all (as with any truly sublime tragicomedy) is how the Playbook Players have rather successfully transformed folks seeking "truth" into the bad guys over the last several years. Last I checked, truth was still a virtue, right up there alongside patience.

They've been painted into the same corner as any other group/individual who dares to question the status quo version of events. How dare we.

Only "great thinkers", the revered gatekeepers of intellect so beloved of the intelligentsia, are allowed to approach such subject matter. We lowly, pot-smoking creative types with less ambition and simpler, less-destructive desires should stick to underground films and starving artist status where we belong...

idiot savant said...

Hey, what, I can't say that Craig Murray has unforgiveably shitty style for shilling for the mass murderers for a couple of gold coins? Why not? Please explain and I might find a synonym for "style" somewhere to tone it down. I know I left one someplace.

idiot savant

Penny said...

Your just snipping about the edges?

Hmmm...isn't that the way?

Or how about, look there a dot, then over there another dot,
behind you another dot...

But they are not connected. Ever.


I rarely touch the topic anymore. I spent many a year discussing all manner of nuances surrounding the buildings collapse, the planes, the obvious standown, norad, building #7.

Why did it fall? Oh yeah, the teeny weeny fires, quick tell me they were roaring.

I will tell you that # 7 was a can check the construction and reconstruction history of that one.

9/11 imo is a continuance of the strategy of tension.

Many people knew about the strategy of tension, the left behind armies, yet, none mentioned them for years and years.
How did they keep they quiet, lol.
Always the same shit.

Who benefits.
The one that benefits has no reason to come clean.
Did afghanistan or iraq benefit from 9/11. no.

Did others benefit, the war machine, the banks, the oil giants...
As long as there is benefit, there is silence.

IN fact as some of you point out, your man Craig benefits from ignoring the arguements against the official conspiracy theory of 9/11 - men with boxcutters, man in cave with dialysis machine.

He ignores because it is beneficial.

In climategate the scientists went along, because it was beneficial...
grants and all help to "put food on the family"
And if you slant your research towards the prechosen angle, you can guarantee a living.
However, the lowly bunch at the bottom just trying to eke out a living were likely not privy to the machinations at the top, the carbon market scam, global taxes, and global control.

As always look to who benefits, and how they benefit....
It is one heck of a motivator.

have fun with it nobody...
oh and angrysoba, checked out your blog....whatever. Yawn.

veritas6464 said...

Hey Nobody, check out George Galloway give it to Jack Straw in the Pommie parliament:



nobody said...

Yeah, but Gallier you hadn't popped in mate. There's plenty of ginger beer to go around but not if you're not here. And 'sad'? Don't forget, we can see you Gallier. Look at that happy face of yours - easily the happiest person here.

And Mir, might that be a rule? Upon first sighting of 'truther' as epithet, it's a cold hard certainty that no sensible discussion is possible since the utterer has declared themselves to be a spook motherfucker, ha ha. And whilst I haven't checked statcounter yet I figure he realised the pointlessness of any tactic based on trashing the conversation and is saving himself for Craig's blog.

And Savant, all right, fine, be that fellow (smiley winky thing). I just tend to save the heavy artillery for zionists, satanists, and paedophiles, you know... real motherfuckers. And I don't think Craig is that. (BTW I have no history with Craig. He doesn't know me from Adam.)

nobody said...

PS And Pen, yes! I meant to mention that: frankly 9/11 is otherwise pretty much off my radar now. I just take it as a given. In many ways it was almost the starting point of the journey for me, and for any number of others here I'm sure.

It's like we're students, all of whom have been studying for however many years now, and suddenly we find ourselves in a conversation about something from our freshman year, first semester. It's interesting, sure, and it's what got us going but, gee whiz, been-there-done-that...

nobody said...

PPS Given that hardlysober's technique pivots on treating each piece of evidence as if it was a link in a chain (rather than a strand in a cable), and given that the technique works or otherwise he wouldn't be using it, I decided I would change that photo of the firemen clustered around that underground source of light. For the regulars here no argument would succeed or fail on the veracity of a single photo but obviously people do fall for such cheap tricks, and so I've posted the other pic I was considering at the time.

nobody said...

Thanks PG, one of the comments there said George Galloway is a Superhero. He sure is.

Actually PG, I wrote you a very long reply here and then realised I was in front-page territory. So I'll whack it up there in a day or two.

Miraculix Augustus said...

I like the "first semester" analogy Mr. N, though in at least a few cases here I suspect it's a question of hanging on to tenure... =)

I was already "radicalized" as far back as what in the states is referred to as "high school" (and it was, let me tell you), by virtue of growing up a curious lad in a territory peppered with native American "reservations" and the tattered remains if the coastal tribes who brought us the ubiquitous totem (coastal Salish, Tlingit, et al.).

I understood the meaning of the word genocide by the time I was ten or eleven. A sure recipe for sticking out like a sore thumb in any social studies class, let me tell you. I had a couple forgiving teachers, from whom I naturally scored top marks, while the rest just tried to pretend I wasn't there, especially when open class discussions were going on.

I was once "assigned" the pro-internment side of the Nissei argument during a debate module by one of the more engaging instructors, and I essentially argued my way OUT of the role and into the "anti-" camp, calling his bluff and going straight to my class counselor with the news that I was going to have to retake US History since I'd be receiving an incomplete due to my stubborn nature.

Funny, it all sorted out in less than fifteen minutes after that move. It was probably the most important lesson I took away from the affair, in long-range hindsight.

My first taste of the word GLADIO came a few years after the school daze, and I rapidly discovered it was one of those "non-words" in the public lexicon. Along with "counter-insurgency" and a few other choice bits of meme-breaking weight.

No prof who was interested in keeping his comfy chair would go anywhere near such subject matter with a ten-foot battle lance. Nobody, and I mean NOBODY, had any idea what I was on about...

...and so it remains, except for those rare online salons where the traffic is so low -- and the subject matter so deep -- as to run off all but the freak jobs like me and a few other hearty souls to whom I won't apply any adjectives, for fear of giving offense where none is intended.

It's lonely in this here cave, watching the shadows play on the wall...

greg said...

To answer the question "How did FDR arrange for Hitler to declare war on the US?"

When Germany attacked Poland to end Poland's intransigence over negotiating the return of German territory (Danzig)stolen after WW1 by the Treaty of Versailles, England Declared war on Germany. Since Germany had a defense pact with Italy and Japan 9 the axis) war was declared by everyone on each other- over a little slice of German territory. Nothing much happened for a while (the Phony War) until the US could be gotten to join up. The American people had ZERO interest in getting into another European war. Roosevelt needed "some catalyzing event" to change public opinion. Thus, he pushed japan over the edge by cutting off their oil supplies, leaving them little choice but to attack and try to neutralize the US. Roosevelt then declared war on Japan causing an automatic declaration of war by Italy and Germany as a result of the Tripartate pact (the Axis).
So, ostensibly, the 6 year war and the killing of 52,000,000 people around the world, was over a small piece of disputed territory territory.
Behind all of this,of course, were a lot of other factors contributing to this madness, but the fact is that Germany didn't want war with the west- he wanted his land back and wanted to fight thecommunists, with the HELP of England as a matter of fact.
To get a bit of the other side of the story, read this:

slozo said...

Excellent piece, Nobody.

Sorry, been offline a few days, and look what I missed?!? I am in China now, and will give you a small snapshot Chinese perspective . . .

Most Chinese think 9/11 was an inside job. In fact, there is a media blanket on international opinions and investigations on 9/11, because the consensus is that it was a gov't inside job.

Sad part is, many Chinese, just like americans, have been brainwashed to be patriotically blind in many areas as well (not entirely like most westerners think, however). It is the way of the world.

It was a very well executed military operation, 9/11, and the fact that people can constantly swallow the litany of half truths, excuses and rationalisations to wallpaper over the cognitive dissonance they feel while watching buildings professionally demolished or viewing plane crashes with no planes - it speaks of an incredible propaganda campaign. A propaganda campaign that started well before 9/11, and continues today, furthering multiple agendas and future false flags.

And Nobody, I have no time for Craig Murray. Not a second, because the first thing I did when you linked to him way back when was I checked out his stand on 9/11, and he utterly failed. So I left.

It is the quickest way to vet the disinfo agents, whether they are complicit/co-opted or not.

Keep up the good work, mate.

nobody said...

Hey you guys,

Mir - well that's me envious mate. I was a true johnny-come-lately and didn't wake up until 2003. Oh well, better late than never...

Greg, very clean round-up! I was actually au-fait on all that but would've taken 2000 words to say the same thing.

Slozo you swine! I haven't been to China for ages now. I'm hanging out for all that food. You know what I miss the most? Jian Bing! Are you in Beijing or Shanghai? They're better in Beijing.

Waitaminute. If you're in China how are you able to comment here? When I was there last, blogspot was firewalled and whilst a proxy allowed me to view the blog, it didn't allow me to comment. What are you doing different?

james said...

Found a recipe here. Additional info in the comments. They sound delicious

nobody said...

James you bastard! That video broke my heart. That's Beijing style with the flat bread stick, and you can hear classic Beijing accent in the background as well.

I'm not so sure about the recipe though. If you watch in the vid, there are three pots of whatever that brown sauce is. In the recipe they just have some skinny looking chili sauce. But if you could get that sauce it'd be a done deal. And the bread stick! Where's the bread stick? If you don't have that then, um, I don't know... what's the point?

Also I reckon a bit of chopped up coriander in with the scallions/shallots is the piece of resistance.

james said...

Ah . . I broken honourable Wok Doctor's oath - First do no heartburn

Please accept humble apologies, Mr Nobby.

Coriander, chilli, shallots and garlic. Maybe drop of lime juice. Yes. What about a cook up???

Anonymous said...


I feel I do need to reply to Greg although I don’t want this to become a gang fight in a blind alley whilst all the traffic is passing by on the main road. In other words if we all pile in correcting each others version of events then Soba will have won by taking a back seat and that is not the intention. It is just that in Greg’s need for brevity there could be some misinterpretation in the run of events. The thing which struck me most was this statement “Nothing much happened for a while (the Phony War) until the US could be gotten to join up.” Hitler was all geared up to snatch a bit of Poland but not for a full frontal attack on Britain. And by the same token Britain was not in a position to take Germany on either. Not very much happened in the phoney war because both sides were tooling up for a fight. But it is completely wrong to give the impression that nothing very much happening in the 20 months between the end of the Phoney War and America turning up on the door waving its membership card. This not very much included over 600 planes of the Luftwaffe knocking the holy shit out of Liverpool; and then later going on to attack Swindon and Birmingham. A U Boat sank the Royal Oak in the Atlantic. Also Rotterdam was decimated and the countries of Luxembourg; Belgium; Netherlands and France all fell to the Germans. Britain virtually wiped out the Luftwaffe in the battle of Britain and this directly resulted in Hitler abandoning Operation Sea Lion designed to harris merchant shipping in the English Channel. It is true that Hitler didn’t want a fight with Britain whilst his interests lay to the east but Chamberlain and the appeasers had their noses bloodied and so they drew their line of hubris in the sand and the rest we know.

Roosevelt’s Lend Lease Act was already in place, not primarily because he wanted to be chummy with his mates across the pond but it was a good deal for the US until they could get into the war proper. The underlying reason The US wanted to get into the war was firstly it was not being fought on American soil and secondly, European arms manufacturers were rubbing their hands in glee and leaving Wall Street financiers out in the cold. Something had to be done to redress the situation and that was the reason for Pearl Harbour. Yes Japan was part of the tripartite axis and the US had been playing ducks and drakes with their oil supplies but the real reason they were so pissed was because the US put a stop to their adventurism in Manchuria.

Having said this, I hope that we can get off this branch line diversion and back onto the main line.

Anonymous said...



NATO is only here to help; it has no other function ;-) Sometimes, after help has been given and the problem has gone away they hang around to make sure there is no further insurgency – just in case you understand. And they hang around and hang around and hang around. Trouble could arise, say in the US by way of example, if the much touted Martial Law were to be declared and there were not enough forces willing to shoot their own. Then the stay behind lot would be there to help, step into the breech as it were since by definition they are ‘not their own’ – together with the ones who are just there for the money of course.

Anonymous said...



Posted the last but meant to ask if you can you enlighten me on the Nissei Argument. That one has fallen through the cracks of my education. I tried to Google it and got a lot of info about Japanese trains :-/

Penny said...


what is the scoop on the swingin' rockefeller found dead in oz?

Peter had the news story up at his blog and I told him it was because Australia is a country of sinners.
(except for you of course ;))

As was deemed by someone and proclaimed in the press, seriously.

idiot savant said...

Eustace Mullins passes.

How much has Craig F. Murray compared to this writer and scholar? 0.000000000000006 %? Less?

idiot savant

nobody said...

FB, Very clean roundup. I was actually au fait on all that etc etc. Ha ha ha, if I was to say that I did wonder at that phrase, would everyone roll their eyes and think, 'Yeah, Yeah Nobody, you're just saying that'. And quite right too. But I didn't take great issue since I figured Greg didn't want to muddy his point and I certainly understand the temptation. Otherwise yes! Thanks for that FB.

And the Nisei? Nisei is Japanese for 'second generation'. (issei, nisei, sansei - first, second, third generation) In the context of either the US or WWII it generally refers to the Japanese who were locked up in internment camps during the war.

Given that no German Americans were locked up, I'm wondering if it wasn't an experiment of the Fabian socialist variety? "We'll just lock up one lot and see how it goes..."

And Pen! Thanks for that, very interesting. The whole story is just getting a standard crime angle here. Very early on they made it clear that they're not related to the Rockefellers in the US but that doesn't sound very likely does it? Somehow I suspect that this story will peter out and we won't hear too much more about it. But you never know...

Anonymous said...


I was actually au fait with the Nisei (He, he) or rather I knew of the internment camps for Japanese in the US but wasn’t familiar with the word Nisei to refer to the prisoners. I first became aware of them some time ago (oblique reference coming up) when the film ‘Snow Falling on Cedars’ first came out. IMO this is one of the finest films of all time. What a story and even the weather has a walk on part. The acting from the whole cast is superb and Max von Sidow’s summing up to the jury is one of the finest pieces of acting I have ever seen.

Miraculix Augustus said...

"...And the Nisei? Nisei is Japanese for 'second generation'. (issei, nisei, sansei - first, second, third generation) In the context of either the US or WWII it generally refers to the Japanese who were locked up in internment camps during the war.

Given that no German Americans were locked up, I'm wondering if it wasn't an experiment of the Fabian socialist variety? "We'll just lock up one lot and see how it goes..."

Thanks for the back-up Mr. N. The equation there was as simple as ever, though expressing such thoughts in this "modern age" of faux equality will get you the proverbial stick from the angry noodles of the world: the Germans were WHITE (enough) and had ROUND eyes.

Naturally, the whole Fabian angle was surely in there as well, what with all those well-documented connections from "over here" to "over there".

The Nis(s)ei issue was personalized for me by my first and only real mentor in my younger daze, a writing teacher (and well-regarded poet) who was "interned" (read: incarcerated) along with the rest of his family when that mouthpiece FDR decided he was an "enemy of the state" at the dangerous age of two years old.

Even if I hadn't been a student of an actual Nisei all those years later, I would still have railed against an assignment to argue the "pro" side of a case against which I was philosophically opposed in every way. For all my hair-splitting talents, I'd make a crap lawyer.

As for NATO FB, I'm hip to that jive. They've never been much more than a bureaucratic cover for all sorts of other operations and covert organizations, all in the name of "peace" -- 'cause we all know that's what every military organization delivers when they come to town: PEACE.

Most "western" people I speak with (especially Americans) still bristle when I describe my adopted homeland (Germany) as an "occupied nation", by way of offering a functional example of how quickly the USSA is likely to depart the looted and polluted sands of ancient Mesopotamia.

Anonymous said...

Let's take 9/11 one step further.

For starters, I have seen live video proving that no airliners hit the WTC towers, taken by a live NBC affiliate on that date.

When a person pulls their head out of their colon, and accepts the fact that the planes were photo-shopped on to the WTC videos (and rather crudely, in places) after the fact, and that there is a time delay between when things happen and when you see them on TV, it explains a number of things, such as:

1) Why there is no video of ANYBODY boarding any of the planes in question, at the boarding gates in question, at the airports in question, on the date in question. Additionally, the FBI stupidly claimed that 9 of the "Arabs" were sent to secondary security, due to "suspicion." If that's so, then why is there no secondary security video of any of them? Are they fucking vampires? And, if they went through this added security, then how could they have possibly taken all of the weapons and such on board that the government claims? And where are the private and federal lawsuits against the airports, airlines, and/or security company(ies) for allowing it to happen? Simple. There are no lawsuits because there is no video of them, and they didn't get those weapons on the planes, because they didn't get on the planes. This also explains why a number of the accused “hijackers” were subsequently found to be alive and living in other countries – quite a trick for a “suicide” pilot/hijacker.

2) Why they have never recovered any tail sections, any of the huge, 6-ton tempered-steel outboard engines (including the struts), any of the tubular steel seat frames, any of the passengers' corpses, any of their luggage, fuselages, the basically indestructible black boxes (which have ALWAYS been recovered before and since 9/11), etc. When planes of that type crash, they leave wreckage.

3) Why a woman who still lives in New York spent 5 years searching for relatives of 64 people on one of the obviously phony passenger lists, and even after hiring detectives, never found a single one.

4) Why Willie Brown and a number of clergy left San Francisco International Airport after a number of hours on that date, because not one family member/relative/friend ever showed up to inquire after any of the alleged passengers on "Flight 93."

5) Why NORAD never intercepted any of these "hijacked" airliners -- because there were none to intercept.

6) Why neither United nor American airlines has ever filed a loss claim for any one of those four flights.

7) Why there is no video of a 757 hitting the Pentagon.

8) Why, up until late 2004, as pointed out by a noted 9/11 researcher, the BTS web site showed that neither of the American flights were even scheduled to fly on that date. The BTS pulled the pages off-line and doctored them, later reposting them, but unfortunately for them, by that time, the original pages had been backed up and widely distributed over the Internet.

9) Why the FAA had the tail numbers of the 2 United flights registered as "valid," meaning that the planes were still in service, until September 28, 2005. The FAA only de-registered them after two other 9/11 researchers kept demanding to know why the planes were still registered as being in service, four years after both the federal government and the airlines had stated for the record that they were destroyed in a “terrorist” attack.

10) Why the FAA's own directory of pilots and their qualifications showed (at least a while ago; they've probably doctored that by now, just as they doctored the BTS web pages after the criminal implications were pointed out) that on 9/11, not one of the eight pilots alleged to have been in the cockpits upon takeoff had a current, valid commercial pilot's license.

greg said...

I would just slightly respond. I don't disagree with what FB wrote- I left out volumes of detail. I might have a slightly different slant though.
Remember I was writing in response to angrysob's snide challenge of "How did FDR arrange for Hitler to declare war on the US?"
Therefore it was written basically in crayon.
Interesting topic though...

nobody said...

FB - Is Snow Falling On Cedars about the internment of Nisei? I had no idea. Believe it or not, I own it but I've never gotten around to watching it. Anyway on the strength of that recommendation I'll get off my arse and see it.

Mir - Speaking of the US staying on in countries they occupied - Ya Bloody Commy! I can think of lots of countries they left, so there. Like Vietnam! And they left Haiti - lots of times! And they left Lebanon on numerous occasions as well. Ha! Me at my Time magazine-reading best...

Oh! I wrote to anon but since I wanted to throw the question open to the punters to see what they thought, and since the comments here were winding down, I thought I'd sling it on the front page.

Off you go...

kikz said...

thankx mir :) i'm huckleberry, to you & noby anyday!

kikz said...

p.s. good catch penn,

i'd seen that... rockefeller...
ya got money you can... poof.

james said...

Re Rockefeller, it seems there was a chainsaw involved
Not your average swingers party!

tal said...

Sorry to be another OT poster but I feel the need to respond to Anonymous FB who was responding to Greg who was responding to noodleman aka angrysoba™ when he stated:

"This not very much included over 600 planes of the Luftwaffe knocking the holy shit out of Liverpool; and then later going on to attack Swindon and Birmingham."

The war of 1939 was ‘less wanted by nearly everybody than almost any other war in history,’ wrote A.J.P. Taylor. In September 1939 a state of war had been declared, but not much was happening, because Germany in no way desired war against Britain[8]. On 15th February, 1940, PM Neville Chamberlain in the House of commons affirmed, ‘Whatever the length to which others may go, H.M.Government will never resort to deliberate attack on women and children, and other civilians, for the purpose of mere terrorism,’ in a reply to Captain Ramsey[9] This reaffirmed his position given on 14th September[10]. City bombing, he emphasised, ‘was absolutely contrary to international law’[11]

1940: Churchill ousts Chamberlain as Prime Minister on May 10th, and on May 11th city-bombing begins[12]. On that night, the day after Churchill’s election, Bomber Command was first permitted to fulfil the purpose for which it was built. Newspapers merely reported that, that night, ‘eighteen Whitley bombers attacked railway installations in Western Germany.’ Winston Churchill and his advisors extended the definition of ‘military objectives’, which had been accepted for two and a half centuries to include factories, oil plants and public buildings - as, would include any town or village. They rendered the definition meaningless.

‘This raid on the night of May 11th, 1940, although in itself trivial, was an epoch-marking event since it was the first deliberate breach of the fundamental rule of civilised warfare that hostilities must only be waged against enemy combatant forces.’[13]

Wonderful blog, BTW.

nobody said...

Tal, that was absolutely brilliant. Aerial bombardment is a particular pet interest of mine and the more I can find out about its origins the better. I haven't read it yet but that link looks like a cracker. I've saved it to desktop and I'll read it tonight. Thanks mate, you are officially 'mentioned in despatches'.

gallier2 said...

Yes tal's link is really good, and in that same vein listen to that Irving conference about Churchill, really eye opening.

Listen to the video, the text at the link in french is not that interesting, so don't bother to decipher it.
I especially liked the part about the translation error (control vs contrôle & Kontrolle) leading to the killing of 23000 french sailors who were sitting ducks. I will have to bring up that anecdote next time on our Intranet when the subject of mistranslations comes up again (you know for which body I work, now you know for which part of that body I work, the IT dept. of the translation unit).

The subject of bombing of cities in WWII has always been a subject that I was interested in, because of the personal witnessing from my parents. My mother, 14 year old at that time, had visited her sister who was in Pomerania for her Arbeitsdienst (shows how oblivious the Germans were about the situation in the East, nobody sane would go to Pomerania in 1945). As they were evacuated she came to Dresden, which was the main hub of transit for Flüchtlinge, because it was considered relatively safe as of no strategic value. The day of the 13th, she talked with a railway worker who told her there would be an unscheduled train at 12 o'clock, she and her sister managed to get the train. It was the last one that day, the rest can be read on

My mother got out on time, my father saw first hand the effects of bombings. In 1943 he worked in Hamburg but fortunately still lived in his home town of Elmshorn, 30km from Hamburg, so he only saw the great fire bombing of Hamburg from that safe distance? But he was then recquired to work out as fire-helper as every valid young and old that was not on the front. The things he witnessed these days are very hard to grasp. When they opened bomb shelters, they saw all the people (women, babies, olds etc.) sitting guietly on their benches turning to dust, like Buffy vampires, at the first wind blow because they dried out from the intense heat. He fell into a mass grave which was not visible because of the layers of dust and ash that had recovered it. He saw people still burning from the phosphorous bomb and much much more. You can imagine the impact of that on the psyche of someone (he was only 15 at that time).

gallier2 said...

omg, I just wrote a long comment with the witness accounts of my parents of the bombings in WWII, and I just lost it, argh. So maybe if I calm down again, I will rewrite it.

nobody said...

Thanks Gallier, it didn't get lost did it? That's it there yeah? I think you just got tricked by the fact that comments for any pieces more than ten days old come to me first.

And I didn't know you were in translations but it makes a lot of sense. As an ex-English teacher if you were my student I'd either be grabbing some Shakespeare or taking you through the Times cryptic, ha ha.

And thanks for the link mate. Is that about Churchill's decision to attack the French fleet? Excellent. I've always been curious about that. I've seen it mentioned in a couple of those hagiographic Churchill docos, but not that that's worth much.

gallier2 said...

Indeed, it was about that episode

and now that I verified (on wikipedia), it was 1300 not 13000, ok my fault.

And lucky that my comment came through, I would never have rewritten it (I couldn't even reread it for correction).

And as my position in the translation departement, funnily it had absolutely nothing to do with my bi-nationality or my language skills, I was chosen for my C and Unix skills only.

gallier2 said...

And btw, I thought my comment was lost because I got an important sounding error message. Apparently it was less critical than it looked like.

nobody said...

Hey Gallier,

As for error messages, I do mention that mate at the top of the comments page.

"If you hit publish your comment and find yourself at a warning page, don't be alarmed. Simply go back one page and in all likelihood you'll find your comment safe and sound."

And Unix? Those were the days. Way back when 3D was on Silicon Graphics boxes I used to hang out with this hacker kid and he taught me how to take control of people's machines and do all sorts of naughty things. I can barely remember any of it now. Gee it was fun though...

gallier2 said...

Hehe, I went back and the message was not there anymore, that's why I thought it was completely lost.
As for Unix, I'm still on it (Solaris) and I have the priviledge to develop in plain C, language applications.