Dr. Kevin Barrett
Conspiracy or MASTER PLAN?
Mon Jul 17, 2006 14:37

AUDIO: 9/11 INSIDE JOB EXPLAINED....Dr. Kevin Barrett

Barrett over Hannity in TKO (in case you missed it)

Conspiracy or MASTER PLAN?

Treason Under the Constitution

Two Plus Two Make Four

By Kevin Barrett, http://mujca.com

Two (2) massive, illegal rollbacks of Constitutional civil liberties were planned during the year before 9/11.

1) The Patriot Act was written before 9/11, rolled out on schedule after the attacks, and rammed through Congress after US military anthrax from Ft. Detrick Biological Warfare Facility was sent to the two congressmen, Daschle and Leahy, who wanted to block it.

2) June 30 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. National Security Agency asked AT&T Inc. to help it set up a domestic call monitoring site seven months before the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, lawyers claimed June 23 in court papers filed in New York federal court...

Two (2) illegal wars of aggression were planned during the year before 9/11 – wars that could not possibly have been launched without the “new Pearl Harbor” effect of 9/11 on public opinion.

1) Former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill writes that the Iraq war was adapted as official policy, and Iraq’s oil fields divvied up, in January, 2001, when George W. Bush ordered an upcoming war of aggression against Iraq: “Show me a way to get it done.” The only conceivable way to get such an illegal war of aggression done, of course, would be a 9/11 “new Pearl Harbor” or its equivalent.

2) According to multiply-sourced reports published by the BBC and other sources, the illegal US invasion of Afghanistan was ordered in July, 2001, and its start date set for October, 2001, before the first snows. The Afghanistan invasion, according to these reports, was a response to the Taliban’s refusal, formalized in July 2001, to accept the Bush Administration proposal for a gas pipeline project. Thus the invasion had nothing to do with 9/11, which only served as a pretext.

Two (2) pre-planned massive, illegal rollbacks of Constitutional civil liberties


Two (2) pre-planned illegal wars of aggression


Four (4) good reasons to think 9/11 was an inside job.

"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows." – George Orwell

Two plus two make four!

* * *


The USA PATRIOT Act Was Planned Before 9/11

by Jennifer Van Bergen


Spy Agency Sought U.S. Call Records Before 9/11, Lawyers Say


US 'planned attack on Taleban'

The wider objective was to oust the Taleban

By the BBC's George Arney

A former Pakistani diplomat has told the BBC that the US was planning military action against Osama Bin Laden and the Taleban even before last week's attacks.


O'Neill: Bush planned Iraq invasion before 9/11


2. John Kerry Thanks Kevin Barrett

John Kerry thanks Kevin Barrett!

This came from info@johnkerry.com

Subject: The Difference You Are Making

Dear Kevin,

Over the last 19 months, when you could have walked away, you dusted yourself off, got back on your feet, dug deeper, and you have fought even harder.

[it goes on like this and finishes:]

Thanks so much for all of your help, energy and commitment. I'm proud of what you do, and I hope I live up to your values and convictions in the way I fight by your side.


John Kerry

Kevin Barrett Replies to John Kerry,

Subject: The Difference You Are NOT Making

Dear John,

You, my “war-hero” friend, are a feckless yellow-bellied WIMP. 19 months ago, when you could have walked away...you did! You let the Bush crime family and their 9/11 perp friends the neocons steal the election you won in a landslide 53%-47%. If you had the slightest shred of guts or integrity, you could have had us all out in the streets taking back the country. Instead, you tucked your tail between your legs and fled like the coward you are. Unless, of course, the two candidates from Skull and Bones had the whole thing fixed in advance. Either way, it appears that masturbating in a coffin in front of your sick Yalie frat buddies doesn't do much for your intestinal fortitude. As far as I'm concerned, you're history. But hey, prove me wrong. Get onboard with 9/11 truth NOW or condemn yourself to historical irrelevance.


Kevin Barrett

* * *

3. A Note from Professor Steven Jones and a response by Greg Ziegler

Though it's very late, I'd like to share a few thoughts before I retire.

1. Evidently there are some who go to considerable lengths to promote the notion that there can never be "proof" of an inside job on 9/11 -- whether that happened or not as an inside job. So, we might as well abandon the effort, and let it go.

Others (I have read) have pointed out this argument was used effectively to stymie further investigation of the JFK assassination. I wonder how many "9/11 truthers" are buying into such a discouraging philosophy?

2. Some OTOH raise the "preponderance of evidence" argument -- that will stand in a court of law or impeachment, if we can ever get to such a trial. This approach may work, given enough time and the opportunity for a trial in an objective court.

3. As a third altermative, I'm seeking solid evidences that approach scientific proof. And I see three possible avenues here:

A. The use of thermite in arson has been proven beyond reasonable doubt in many cases already: Fire investigators have developed techniques to pin down the use of thermite, as I discussed in my LA talk. The signature residues of thermite are so distinctive -- when one uses EDS, XRF and other methods -- that it is indeed possible to prove arson by thermite. This gives me hope that this approach can be effectively used to prove thermite use on 9/11. (And I deeply appreciate your help in this research effort!)

Note also that while I'm leaning now to the use of thermite-containing sol-gels, it is possible that cylinders containing thermite as you have found patents for could have [also] been used. Finding such a cylinder would indeed be a dramatic proof in itself, I believe.

B. Showing that the Towers and/or WTC 7 would not have collapsed so rapidly or in the way they did, if fires alone had initiated collapse.

Here the published works of Prof. Kuttler and Gordon Ross (and others) are hopeful -- in that their line of reasoning and calculations could very well lead to a conclusion that deliberate actions would have been required to bring the buildings down in the WAY THEY WERE OBSERVED TO COLLAPSE.

C. Confession by an insider, particularly a high-up insider with detailed insider information which could be checked, would end the debate also.

D. Another 9/11-type "catalyzing event" may be staged by perpetrators, and with the number of people aware of the likelihood of such staged events and WATCHING, it is likely that the data will be gathered quickly and not effectively destroyed this next time. (I'm remembering here the way the steel was shipped to Asia for recycling from the 9/11 events, for example) . In this way, the perps would be stopped -- by observant citizens working together.

So no, I do not accept the defeatist arguments that the debate over 9/11 will never end. Indeed, I am inclined to believe, because of the progress lately in the areas delineated above -- that the end of the debate will come rather soon. I believe this will happen before the 2008 elections, if we keep pressing forward as we have in recent months, in the "9/11 Truth Movement."

My desire here is to encourage you to keep up the investigative and highly supportive work that you have done, for which I offer my deepest appreciation.

Best wishes and regards,

Steven E. Jones"

* * *

A brilliant response from a friend and colleague, Greg Ziegler PhD, to my earlier post, “A Note from Prof. Steven Jones” [Greg is a former US Military Intel officer and retired professor]. I would urge you to pass this on...

Of course the guilty would love to say that we will never get to the bottom of the issue. By now, the theoretical case has in effect been settled. Silverstein admitted blowing up WTC7, no evidence of a 757 at the Pentagon has been forthcoming, etc.

The real attitude of the perps could best be paraphrased as follows:

"You have no power. As far as we are concerned, we can keep debating for ever. We can even have annual conspiracy conventions on 9/11, with a host of speakers. To use a Russian expression, the dogs may bark as the train roars along. You are the dogs, and we are the train. Keep whining. We will keep on declaring ourselves unconvinced. We still own the TV, we still own the military, and you can chatter on the internet all you want as you fade into ineffectual obscurity."

That is the essence of their real position.

My attitude [and our attitude, in my opinion] is this:

"You have wrecked the economy. Enron is merely a symptom of a looted nation, including 2.6 trillion missing from the Pentagon, an uncontrollable trade deficit, a crashing domestic automotive industry, etc. You are facing military exhaustion, as your megalomaniacal schemes for world domination are collapsing because of overpriced weaponry and a disappearing base of military manpower. We can and will wait until economic collapse and military exhaustion set in. At that time, you will have no power. The arrests, interrogations, and trials will take place. There will be no further debate. The issue will be settled by evidence in criminal judicial proceedings, as they were when your colleagues in Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan ran out of power to bully dissent."

This is not a matter of truth, but power. As long as the perps cling onto the power they value (TV and the military) they feel they can safely pretend to be unconvinced by even the most overwhelming arguments. Only when their power collapses will the weight of the arguments be acknowledged.

Remember, even Galileo was forced to recant his view that the earth revolves around the Sun. Only when the Thirty Years War was over, in 1648, could a sizeable portion of the population of Europe defy the ecclesiastical power structure to recognize the cogency of Galileo's truths. If Galileo himself had to undergo the humiliation of an actual recantation, who are we to complain that the perps, naturally enough, claim that we will never resolve the issue?

Galileo won. So will we. But only when the power of the perps is broken.

* * *

4) One of the hundreds of letters of support I’ve been getting

[Interestingly, even after appearing on Fox, my email is running 90% positive—over 60% positive from people who just happened to see me on Fox! The positive 90% are uniformly intelligent, well-written and articulate, while the negative 10% are almost all from illiterates who misspell words even in primitive grunts like “you are craizy.” Goes to show that 9/11 is basically an intelligence test.]


This is quite a story that is unfolding re: your link posted below.

Sooner or later Rep. Nass will realize he has lost this horse race before it even started.

I'm confused as to which is worse. Nass's contempt and arrogance towards the U.W. System and Prof. Barrett or his refusal to accept the fact that he's been allied with and honoring a band of no good, two bit, lying bastards that have no regard for human life whatsoever. i.e. the G.W.B Administration and their criminal cohorts at the Pentagon and DOJ.

My best guess is the cognitive dissonance epiphany Rep. Nass is experiencing will more than likely drive him into a local asylum - see link to one of the best in the Madison area : http://www.dhfs.state.wi.us/MH_Mendota/Mendota/MMHIHist.htm

or substance abuse treatment center. Or both.

The poor S.O.B. wouldn't know the truth if it bit him in the ass.


AUDIO: 9/11 INSIDE JOB EXPLAINED....Dr. Kevin Barrett

Steal This Movie! "Hell No We Won't Go!" Abbie Hoffman

In defense of the conspiratorial world view

by Jay Esbe
July 13, 2006 at 05:46:15

Main Page - Friday, 07/21/06

Message Board by American Patriot Friends Network [APFN]


messageboard.gif (4314 bytes)