Comments on CIA's Internet Fakes

[tj]

Saying that UK & US intelligence & covert operations groups may have been responsible for some of the shenanigans previously blamed on Israel may be the quickest way to earn a “flame” in virtually any Right- or Left-Wing discussion group. Therefore, let me earn my stripes… I would prefer, however, that this discussion remain focused on whether or not the primarily-Western perpetrators of 9/11 have employed a deliberate “fake opposition strategy,” giving special attention to fake internet disinformational sources. ;D

According to Webster Tarpley’s book, “9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in the USA,” there is a high-speed data link running from the U.S. National Security Agency to the UK’s MI6. There is no comparable link for Israel. Therefore, Israel had to employ the likes of Jonathan Pollard to gather intelligence on what the UK & the US were doing. My resulting question, however, is not whether or not some Israelis had anything to do with 9/11. Clearly, they did (as did every other major intel & covert ops group on this planet). My question is: Who was more responsible, UK & US? Or Israel?

The so-called War on Terrorism has resulted in the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq. In both of these countries, the UK and the US have employed techniques that deliberately piss off as many Muslims as possible… which has resulted in more and more actual Muslim-initiated terrorism. If competent action to accomplish their stated purposes were a crime, then Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz would be innocent.

Clearly, Rumsfeld & Wolfowitz can’t be serious in what they say that they are doing – because they may be accomplishing precisely the opposite of their stated goals. Wolfowitz has a Muslim mistress. Is Wolfowitz actually Jewish? More importantly, are the War in Iraq and the War on Terrorism really helping to accomplish the goals of Israel? Do Israelis feel any safer now than before the War in Iraq began? Do you?

Ariel Sharon and the G8-Globalists are now embroiled in an effort to “return” portions of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank to the Palestinians. The only problems with this scheme are that the Gaza Strip and the West Bank were never a part of Palestine, and ceding such territories to the Palestinians may result in even greater (deliberate) chaos in the Middle East. Who are Ariel Sharon’s allies in this misguided & counterproductive “Peace Process”? Ariel Sharon’s allies are George W. Bush, many of the Neo-Cons, Tony Blair, the G8, the Council on Foreign Relations, and most of the other groups included under the rubric of the so-called “New World Order.” Who is fooling whom?

Is the Neo-Con ideology actually pro-Israel? Even asking this question may seem sacrilegious to the established dogma of both the Right and the Left. Let’s begin by asking some fundamental questions… Has anything that the Neo-Cons EVER done ever increased Israel’s actual security and the feeling of safety of the average Israeli (much less you)? If not, then why not? Who created the Neo-Cons? One good answer is that the Bush family is at the founding core of the Neo-Cons.

Who is the Bush family? Bush family money comes in great part from working with and trading with the Nazis during World War II. Bush family money is also oil money. “Big Oil,” Allen Dulles, John Philby, Kim Philby, and the Bush family (Prescott Bush, in particular) were at the core of pro-Nazi interests during World War II.

Where did most of the high-level Nazis go after World War II? Who significantly and dispositively helped to elect Ronald Reagan, Daddy Bush, and Boy George? Who is James Baker? Who is Karl Rove? If you were Israel, then would you trust pro-Nazi interests to be the founding fathers of the group that is supposedly your best international ally?

Are the Neo-Cons one of the best “False Flag” ideological groups that was ever created as a long term PsyOp? Are the Neo-Cons the Keystone Kops for policing & protecting Israeli interests? Are the Neo-Cons the group that everyone loves to hate? In part as a result, is Israel the country that everyone loves to hate? With friends like the Neo-Cons, does Israel really need enemies? Do you?

Let’s get back to the 9/11 & London Bombings internet PsyOp War. Why is Israel trotted out on the internet (on both Right- & Left-Wing sites) as the “#2 Patsy” for everything from 9/11 to the London Bombings? Could it be that the real 9/11 & London Bombing perpetrators may prefer not to take all of the credit for what they have done?

Above, “That Bob Guy” says in his posting: “[O]nly Israeli intel can impersonate Arab 'terrorists'. As a matter of fact, they're THE experts at it. Zionists invented modern terrorism, for crying out loud.”

Oh, really? Have you ever heard of Lawrence of Arabia (British)? Have you ever heard of the Muslim Brotherhood (British)? Did these events occur before or after Israel became a country? Who overthrew the Shah of Iran and installed the Ayatollah Khomeini (British – with the help of the CIA and Kim Philby at the KGB)? Is Israel really safer now that the Mullahs are in power in Iran? Who installed Saddam Hussein as the dictator of Iraq? Are you beginning to get the picture? How big is it? Do you feel safer now?

Let’s move to a PsyOp that may be playing in both mainstream and alternative media theaters near you… Are the UK, the US and/or Israel actually about to nuke or invade Iran? If you were the ones who installed the Mullahs in Iran (i.e. UK, USSR & US), then would you really want to nuke your buddies? British Foreign Minister Jack Straw travels to Tehran to visit his buddies on a regular basis. Israel is helping Iran with its nuclear energy program behind the scenes. China just signed a $200 Billion oil & gas deal with Iran (possibly to RAISE the price of oil, but that's another funny story...). The Bush family has had good relations with the Mullahs ever since Daddy Bush was CIA director (and since Iran-Contra). The Iranian intellectual community (inside & outside of Iran) believe that the Mullahs are still good buddies with the UK and the US. Who is fooling whom?

Why does deliberate chaos happen primarily in oil producing regions & countries (and in primarily Muslim countries, such as Iraq, Iran, Nigeria, etc.)? Could it be to drive UP the price of oil? Who benefits?

If we don’t unravel the internet PsyOp that continues to play out with unfortunately increasing credibility, force, and frequency before our very eyes, then what else can we expect?

Let me know. (Fintan, please don’t hog all of the flames… )

[shadow=red,left,300][glow=red,2,300]T J[/glow][/shadow]

Margaret Meade: “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed people can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.”

[kathy]

Hi TJ

Could you do something with the color of your font? Black and dark green do not go well on a grey background. Perhaps shocking pink would be a better choice? ;D

I look forward to reading your posts.

Thanks

[ricochet]

Let me be clear- don't pull your deceptive techniques on me. Every thinking person who has followed the crimes and corruptions of the US government know the usual suspects are Israel, zionists(a.k.a. Neocons) and their helpers. The usual suspects are the guilty ones whose names are hidden from the media but whom all of us are too familiar with. The usual suspects are the ones as I speak are being investigated by Patrick Fitzgerald.

[Hawkwind]

"These are not the droids you're looking for."

Sorry, I couldn't resist .... :-)

"You can go about your business... Move along."

[tj]

“’E-Qaeda’ Terrorists Turn to the Web as Base of Operations” screams the Washington Post headline and story, which covers almost everything “above the fold” in its Sunday paper. This is Part 1 of a 3-part series. See www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/05/AR2005080501138.html.

The article states that “In the snow-draped mountains near Jalalabad in November 2001, as the Taliban collapsed and al Qaeda lost its Afghan sanctuary, Osama bin Laden biographer Hamid Mir watched ‘every second al Qaeda member carrying a laptop computer along with a Kalashnikov’ as they prepared to scatter into hiding and exile. On the screens were photographs of Sept. 11 hijacker Mohamed Atta.” This is such crap!

In addition to the verifiable fact that al-Qaeda does not even exist as a cohesive group (except as motivated, encouraged, and created by the UK, the US, and others), Muslims unfortunately constitute one of the least internet-savvy cultures on the planet. The reason is that Muslims (rightfully or wrongfully) consider the internet to be the next battleground (after TV and print media) to undermine the Muslim culture.

I know this to be true from the many Muslims and Muslim countries with & in which I do business. For the most part, my Muslim friends & associates are not internet savvy. I cannot even reach some of my Muslim contacts by email. This is unfortunate. If Muslims were internet-savvy, then they might realize that they are being set up as “Patsy #1” in the War on Terror.

This Washington Post article is one of the opening salvos against the internet (and against you & me). Remember the Oklahoma City Bombings (which were solely blamed on a couple of Militia-loving extremists)? Further back, remember the Tate-LaBianca Murders (which were solely blamed on Charles Manson and his band of “Hippy” followers)? Then we had 9/11 and the London Bombings (solely blamed on al-Qaeda, on the US, and/or on Israel). Now we have internet-savvy “E-Qaeda” followers who are proliferating around the world. Were all of these events well-orchestrated PsyOps to kill the culture or group on which the violence was blamed?

Never fear! We have Jeff Rense, Alex Jones, and a myriad of internet others who will expose the fact that it’s not really the Muslims who are doing this. It’s the Bohemian Grove aficionados. It’s the Bilderbergers. It’s Israel. It’s Bush, Cheney, and the US Government. Or it’s… [take your pick].

Is there any possibility that these operations and PsyOps are bigger and longer-term than Israel and the US Government (and maybe even bigger than the G8)? Let me know.

[shadow=red,left,300][glow=red,2,300]T J[/glow][/shadow]

“Now where did I put that d**ned forest? I can never seem to find one when I’m in one (or am one).” – Forrest Gump (I think).

[whatthe]

FINTAN'S ERROR:

Indeed the 911 truth movement is littered with fakes. And two of the individuals who have been most vocal and consistent about exposing them are Angie D'Urso of angieon911.com and Brian Salter of questionsquestions.net - both of whom strangely appear on Fintan's black list.

Point of fact, Fintan's audio commentary on the on the "9/11 Truth Statement" is a shameless lift of Salter's January '05 article:
www.questionsquestions.net/docs04/911truthstatement.html

Moreover, Fintan's comments on Sibel Edmonds (whom he once breathlessly promoted) directly mirror Miss D'Urso investigations:
mysite.verizon.net/vze25x9n/id29.html
&
mysite.verizon.net/vze25x9n/id4.html

FINTAN, PLEASE EXPLAIN TO US WHY, if you think so much of Salter and D'Urso's work as to present it as your own, why would you include these individuals on your list of disinfo operatives? Did you think that no one would notice?

This is not a small detail - this is not a case of petty plagiarism - this goes to the very heart of Fintan's intentions. Does he intend to present an honest, sincere and internally consistent argument, or does he intent to taint great swaths of researches, mixing the good with the bad?

Yes, we're all waiting for your proof. Seems like you have your work cut out for you.

And on the topic of solid research, could you enlighten us as to the identity of "David Gray of 911Truth.org".
wagnews.blogspot.com/2005/08/911-coverup-current-status.htm

Oh yes, David Gray - must be the author of "The New Pearl Harbor... from Venus".

Fintan, get some sleep. Your ego needs a rest.

[highlander67]

Fintan, having listened to your thingy about the CIA, I have to beg to differ.

You are trying to propose to us that G8 or whatever is controlling the whole shooting match.

Sorry, but you've been watching too many James Bond movies. G8 is not a cohesive mutually cooperative bunch. Each and every G8 leader has his own selfish agenda. You are an intellignet guy so I don't need to elaborate on that statement.

No. This present world scenario is very simply a local greed and selfishness. There is no super power pulling the strings of the various leaders. Greed and power in ANY humans boils down to - Money, sex and power - power over women / little girls / little boys, watever your perverted proclivity.

If there were such an animal as this G8 thing, they would, by deduction, have to be super-intelligent. Now please tell me who, with a modicum of common sense intelligence, would unleash the vile destructive power of many hundreds of tons of depleted uranium in a form that can be propagated around every country on planet earth by the natural phenomenon of weather. As has been said so often, that stuff has a HALF life of 4.7 Billion years.

Just ha'e a wee google of images for "birth defects du" to get a small taste of what has been unleashed on planet earth. Or even look at www.uruknet.info/?p=14466&hd=0&size=1&l=x.

No man - these are small selfish greedy perverts frantically competing to satisfy their own particular perversions.


H.

[terryd]

Fintan is NOT a joke. Lets open our minds a little here. Its amazing how people like to put their favorite gurus on a thrown like they are f**king royality. I also like Kathy's comments about people wanting to read/hear about fear and so sites like AJ cater to their needs. I am personally very tired of all this fear stuff that we see not only in the mass media but also the online "conspiracy" media. I guess I have processed alot of fears so there is not much that scares me. My emotions are another thing. Working on that one.

[tj]

Highlander says (above): "[Fintan], You are trying to propose to us that G8 or whatever is controlling the whole shooting match... G8 is not a cohesive mutually cooperative bunch. Each and every G8 leader has his own selfish agenda... No. This present world scenario is very simply a local greed and selfishness."

If the leader of each G8 country (plus Israel & China) were merely selfish & greedy, then why have the super-competent intel groups of these other countries NOT exposed what the UK & US (or fanatical Muslims or fanatical Israelis, or whoever) have done in 9/11 and the London Bombings? Could it be that there is some cohesive motivation for NOT doing so? If so, then what is it? Can any leader of any major country on this planet be elected or installed without being bribable or blackmailable?

If you were the G8 leaders (or maybe the controllers above or behind the G8), then wouldn't you want to conceal what is actually going on? One way of doing so may be to float stories about fake fights amongst the G8. If you control the media (mainstream & alternative), then maybe you could do such a thing. This might distract people from thinking that the G8 may be acting as a team...

Who might have brought the G8 together as a team? One answer may be that threats of mutually-assured nuclear & electromagnetic destruction may have led the G8 leaders (and their elite backers) to realize that they may not be able to conquer each other – but they may be able to further subjugate & pilfer their own citizens and to subjugate, pilfer and/or depopulate the rest of the planet. What do you do when you can't kill your enemy – without your enemy killing you? Another answer may be extra-terrestrial and/or interdimensional forces (not just as David Icke semi-NON-credibly asserts). Who are our leaders? Another answer may be multi-Trillion-dollar Nazi interests who escaped after World War II (with British, Soviet, Vatican, and U.S. assistance). How much control does a few Trillion dollars buy? In addition to a combination of the above, there may be other possible answers.

The radical "Right" in America may have been destroyed & demoralized in the OKC Bombing, Waco, Ruby Ridge, and by infiltration. The radical "Left" in America may have been destroyed & demoralized by the stolen 2004 elections, futile opposition to the wars in Iraq & against Terrorism, and by infiltration. Both the Right & the Left may be being demoralized & destroyed by the elimination of our Constitutional freedoms. Covert internet PsyOps & infiltrated fake opposition may be being used in & against both the Right & the Left.

Is our military stronger now than before we invaded Iraq? Are you safer now? Are our health & eeducational systems better than those of other countries? Are we smarter & healthier now? Is our economy stronger now after NAFTA, CAFTA, massive deficits, and out-sourcing American jobs? Are you richer now? Who is actually doing this to America (and to our planet)? Is it really the Muslims or the Jews who benefit from destroying our political, military, health, educational, and economic systems? If not, then who does benefit?

[glow=red,2,300]T J[/glow]

"The minority (the ruling class) has the schools, the press, and usually the Church under its thumb. This enables the ruling class to organize and to sway the emotions of the masses -- and to make tools of them." -- Albert Einstein (30 July 1932 Letter to Sigmund Freud)

[highlander67]

You're making it too complicated tj. Gotta remember that the majority of elected leaders in the western countries (I live in the "far east") are verging on educational subnormality.

But as you say, this is probably a bit off-thread. As I am a newbie here, I'll sit back and observe before making any further comments.

[tj]

There is a new Balkanalysis article quoting Sibel Edmonds on the so-called terrorist nuclear threat at www.balkanalysis.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=547. Quoting the article in relevant part: “The latest issue of Vanity Fair features FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds… What sends chills down one’s spine is the following revelation: “…Yet another [phone conversation] implied that Turkish groups had been installing doctoral students at U.S. research institutions in order to acquire information about black market nuclear weapons. … There was talk, she told investigators, of laundering the profits of large-scale drug deals and of selling classified military technologies to the highest bidder.” … If not bin Laden himself, is it beyond possibility that such foreign terrorists were finding ways to procure secret American weapons technology, from corrupt officials in the US government itself?” If you are interested in the full Vanity Fair article on Sibel, it is available through the following link: pogoblog.typepad.com/pogo/files/vanityfair_clean.pdf. Even if everything that Sibel is saying here and elsewhere (and about which she hints) is true, then how does she fail to indirectly support the 9/11 “Official Story” (including the latest and greatest “Fear & Confusion” PsyOps)?

If reports that Ramsey Clark is requesting that Saddam Hussein’s other attorneys restrain their questioning and verbal attacks on the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq (e.g., www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/08/1345258), then this is another reason to question Ramsey Clark’s bona fides. Since Ramsey Clark and “Saddam’s” other attorneys do in fact have evidence that the “Saddam” in custody is a sham, and since U.S. occupation forces are not even allowing Ramsey and the “Sham Saddam’s” other attorneys to meet with the “Sham Saddam,” then why isn’t Ramsey questioning whether or not his client even exists? Is Ramsey just another “dog” who can’t bark? See “The Silent Dogs of the New Improved Saddam” at wagnews.blogspot.com/2005/08/silent-dogs-of-new-improved-saddam.html. If Ramsey Clark (President Lyndon Johnson’s Attorney General and Supreme Court Justice Tom Clark’s son) is really a long-term PsyOp disinfo agent, then the Left (including me) has truly been misled for a long, long time.

One of the best articles questioning Daniel Ellsberg’s bona fides may be by Brian Salter at www.questionsquestions.net/docs04/ellsberg.html (“Daniel Ellsberg, Sibel Edmonds, and 9/11: Skeptical Research Notes”).

Ralph Nader’s long-term office space has been provided by the Carnegie Endowment for World Peace, which sometimes has a tendency to work for the opposite of its name. Even if Ralph Nader’s bona fides may be beyond reproach, when was the last time that Ralph Nader accomplished anything truly effective? Is it possible that Ralph too is misled?

If such long-term heroes of the Left are really slow-moving or wrong-moving stalking horses, then is it really that hard to imagine that some of the lesser-known luminaries of the Left may also be ready for the glue factory (assuming, for the moment, that the glue factory was not their point of origin)? Although I disagree with part of “The List,” if the sites & groups that Fintan and Kathy name on “The List” are not the sites & groups of the internet fakes and fake opposition, then which ones are?

Most of the stalwart locomotives of the Left may be taking us down the wrong tracks and/or subtly in the wrong direction. Is it time to get off this train? Is it time to lay new tracks? Is it time to find and build new locomotives and other political vehicles?

[shadow=red,left,300][glow=red,2,300]T J[/glow][/shadow]

“Your theory is crazy, but it's not crazy enough to be true” – Niels Bohr (to a young physicist)

[marc]

The theory about fake opposition, with periodically rising and dashed hopes, being a CIA-controlled psyop, makes sense, but I wonder how much of the failures we see from Left opposition leaders can be attributed to actual failures, as opposed to "fake" failures. In other words, if someone like Sibel Edmonds or Ralph Nader or Mike Ruppert doesn't go deep enough in their analysis or doesn't achieve substantial success in turning the tide of public opinion or winning lawsuits against the cirminals, or whatever, how much of this may be explained as human failures -- like they really tried, and did the best they could, but were hampered/ridiculed/ignored/misled -- as opposed to assuming such people to be on the payroll of the CIA and deliberately serving as Left gatekeepers?

Either way, it's a powerful argument for each of us to take things into our own hands and not rely on opposition leaders or figures of any kind (including Fintan Dunne) to do what needs to be done. The reason I raise the question is because false accusations are liable to breed suspicion and mistrust, not only of the messenger (e.g. Fintan Dunne) but also of each other and the whole 9-11 / G8 / NWO etc. research community, which arguably should be cooperating. Suspicion and paranoia, taken too far, can be paralyzing. Healthy skepticism is certainly good, but self-righteous smearing and labeling is a divisive tactic that we should avoid falling prey to, lest we come to resemble those whom we point the finger at. As someone else in this thread mentioned, when you point a finger at someone else, three fingers are pointing back at you. And you don't have to be a CIAgent or have any malicious intent for that to be true, and for others to mistrust you as a result of wide, unfounded, inadequately-defended accusations.

To propose a theory (such as the extensive infiltration, even substantial control, of the 9/11 truth movement and the Left in general) is one thing, but to state the theory as fact is something else.

Because to accept such a far-reaching theory on scarce evidence requires suspending our critical-thinking faculties and handing over our trust to an individual -- which is exactly what we shouldn't be doing, especially if your theory is correct!

[Hawkwind]

Hey Fintan,

I have an idea to cut down on the confusion in regard to your list .... I'm now listening to Mike Rivero on John Clayton's show. Please collapse your list to just whatreallyhappened.com! What scripted damage control and controlled opposition! :-) No need for the others, I think we found the high volume "controlled" hub on the internet! Just a thought .... and Iran is next ... you misheard it here first! :-)

Disaster G.

[ozregeneration]

Hi guys,

It's been interesting observing how your research has come across web sites which I'm often seeing posted on a yahoo group I'm on. In fact this morning someone just posted the 4 star general story at Alex Jones. Another guy that I often see referenced is Stew Webb, a self proclaimed whistleblower. In your research, have you come across him. I know Alex M. has had him on a couple of times. Here's his web site www.stewwebb.com/index.html. He seems to cover similar stories to Alex Jones.

It's been very interesting following through your train of thought recently as it linked nicely to David Ickes latest book and some of things he was discussing about DNA programming. Now, while I would tend to agree to that his site gets sucked into posting the 'CIA type' stories, I've found his info on consciousness, DNA, etc to be very worthwhile.

[dvishnu]

Fintan,

I find it quite amusing that other alt news sites have followed your recent lead and made their own black list of disinfo sites...I must admit that none however, have coined such a colorful evil category as CIA Internet Fakes....Kinda rolls right off your tongue like a 16 pound bowling ball...It was also very nice of you to post a disclaimer of intent...With over 3 years of research under your belt, I'm sure you're prepared to to elaberate at length as to why these sites made your crap list...

Of course there are the obvious 9-11 LIHOP and peak oil ruses...Those are the easy ones...They don't just misdirect...They limit the scope of the hangout and eventually lead to dead ends...Many of these organizations have a money trail leading to serious established multinational power brokers...Touché

Next are the sites that overplay the Israel/false flag op paradigm...Not that I believe they're completely innocent, but the art students openly celebrating the collapse of the towers coming down seemed to me to be too obviously scripted and staged to be legitimate...I'd compare it to the "miraculous" street discovery of one of the fake hijacker's passport in nearly pristine condition...Another dead end...

But that still leaves quite a few sites that merit more than just a passing sentence or band aid paragraph as to WHY....

Then I read your piece Hijacking The Real Reporter...You did quite a hatchet job on Jon Rappoport...You accuse him of working for the CIA...But seemingly more importantly to you, you've convicted him by proxy of plagerizing a couple of your "exclusives" in order to marginalize and bury the name of Fintan Dunne...This is the same Jon who was on your show at least a few times...This is also the same Jon who penned a book about the hoax called AIDS long before anyone else did...This is the same Jon who you have based much of your SARS research upon....In fact, much of what you wrote regarding the above medical lies and fake diseases in general was based on his initial research...

Sounds like the pot is calling the kettle black...Not to mention that your feelings might be hurt...

Care to share with the rest us the tangible proof you have on Mr. Rappoport? You know, being CIA......

Incidently, the same angle regarding the 7/7 attacks was also posted on Rense...However, I don't recall the date it was initially posted...

Care to comment?

Best,
DVishnu

[Hawkwind]

Dear Fintan's Mom,

In the context of the "CIA" label, used as a shorthand for sites that play the disinfo game ( could be NSA, M5, M6, FBI, UN, Mosad) ... Alex Jones is not a CIA agent ... he is just a "hump"! The big question is ... does he have one hump or two? You too are transparent ... how many humps do you have?

[elfis]

Howdy everyone, I'm SMiles Lewis from Austin, Texas. I've been following Fintan's work for a while now. I've always enjoyed his insights and especially his web radio show - which needs a podcast BTW.

I am fairly active on the 911TruthAction yahoo group and when the CIA Internet Fakes article broke it pissed off a lot of folks there - several of whom have sites on the list.

As an Austinite I am VERY familiar with Alex Jones and his efforts. When I was first introduced to his work I was not that interested in what he had to say. But over time I saw the accuracy (and inaccuracies) in his presentations and research.

In recent months I've been monitoring Fintan's approach to analyzing the post 911 psyop against the Parapolitical Truth Movements. As an agnostic pluralist in my approach to all things parapolitical his analyses seem aperpo [sic?] to me.

So when his latest round of "movement bashing" broke I posted the following to the 911TruthAction yahoo group:

<groups.yahoo.com/group/911TruthAction/message/14317>

"We need grassroots unity -not organizational unity.
Because there is a gameplan behind all these spats.

<SNIP>

The best defense is for 9/11 activists not to over-depend
on 'movements' and take more of their own initiatives. Many have become experts in their own right on these issues. Acting individually, in loose networks of co-operation we can ride out the pre-arranged fall of the fake 9/11 movement and keep burning the flame of truth -for however long it takes."

The above words are from a followup article by Fintan Dunne (one of several) about his accusations of "CIA FAKES" related to the subversion of the 911 movement and parapolitical investigations in general.

Read these followups and listen to his interviews on the subject (linked below) and decide for yourself if you think he is off base.

While I don't support divisiveness, I do support critical examination of our efforts with an eye towards how we can be, have been and are being MANIPULATED by those behind the 911 attacks.

Note the quote I included above and how it fits the description of "911TruthAction." At the conclusion of Kathy McMahon's interview of Fintan he recapitulates that sentiment.

He is highly critical of Alex Jones and others but he also credits them for the good work they often do.

As for allegations of plagiarism ... having read and listened to the relevant bits by Fintan and the links presented by those making the accusation, I see no evidence for the claim that Fintan has plagiarised anyone.

On the other hand, while I agree with Fintan's overall analysis of how the 911 movement is being manipulated, I don't think he's done enough to support his broad brush approach to paint so many honest truth seekers as CIA controlled.

SMiles Lewis
<www.ParaPolitics.info> (apparently NOT part of the CIA fakes - dang!)


9/11 Coverup : Current Status
'Two Hardware Stores' as 9/11 Goes 'Nuts'
by Fintan Dunne, 5th August, 2005
<wagnews.blogspot.com/2005/08/911-coverup-current-status.html>


Kathy McMahon interviews Fintan Dunne about:
The Story Behind the CIA Fakes
DSL
<www.kathymcmahon.utvinternet.com/mrn/audio/InsideTrackNews050808.mp3>
56k
<www.kathymcmahon.utvinternet.com/mrn/audio/InsideTrackNews050808b.mp3>
<wagnews.blogspot.com/2005/08/cias-internet-fakes.html>

'The Pied Piper of the London Bombing
<wagnews.blogspot.com/2005/08/pied-piper-of-london-bombing.html>

London Bombers -Did They Board at Luton?
Thursday, July 21, 2005
<wagnews.blogspot.com/2005/07/london-bombers-did-they-board-at-luton.html>

See Also:
Evidence Luton CCTV Image is Fake
<wagnews.blogspot.com/2005/07/evidence-luton-cctv-image-is-fake.html>
How Black Ops Staged the London Bombings
<wagnews.blogspot.com/2005/07/how-black-ops-staged-london-bombings.html>

After I posted the above... my good friend whose website I host, began being spammed by someone who is constantly forwarding this CIA INTERNET FAKE article to him. My friend, Mack White, didn't recall Fintan's other work that he and I have both cited and reposted on our sites in the past and so he posted a very angry couple of paragraphs that you can read here ... <www.MackWhite.com>

Right after he posted that he called me and I gave him as much of an information download as I could on Fintan's work and why I wasn't completely writing him off like so many others have now done.

Anyway, now that I know about this forum and have seen Fintan's responsiveness to several of the posts I will ask this question ...

Fintan, now that you've posted a few more articles after your CIA Fake list, as well as a couple more web radio episodes, can you please explain to us the process you used in your determination that these sites are mostly (not totally - as you have said you agree with some of their work) promoting the CIA's (and how do we know it's not NSA, FBI, DIA what have you) disinfo gambits / strategems? In one of your post CIA fakes web radio episodes you say that this 2-3 year investigation involved "infiltration". What sort of infiltration was involved with determining these sites veracity in promoting the "truth" versus "disinfo"? You seem to be dolling out the "evidence" for your determinations on the list at a very piecemeal pace. I assume you are planning a more fully fleshed out explanation of your investigation.

I hope that part of that fleshed out explanation involves a list of "trusted" websites whom you think best exemplify the efforts of the parapolitical movement.

Sincerely,
SMiles Lewis.

<www.ParaPolitics.info>
<www.AnomalyNews.com>
<www.ELFIS.net>
<www.911Activism.info>

[v]

Hello fintan. Fllowing you much more than usual this last month, its also becoming more and more obvious to me that this deception is goin on for a big part on the net. When first you get into thinkin that way, its surely the only thing that seem obvious considering that theres a lot of professional and scheming people involved, that dont just throw things out there for nothing. Theres a bit too much for it to just be mistakes. I dont know though why you havent made anything out of the conspiracy-bait, socalled terrorist expert John Loftus that stated on FOX that MI6 was protecting terrorists. If you listen to the Alex jones show with him, its so clear that the guy was prepared for almsot anything alex had to say. My guess is that he knew that a guy like alex would be the first to pick up on it, so he had done some study beforehand to twist his own views into it. Give it a listen if you havent already, its pretty revealing...also notice at the end, he's just about to compare what osama is all about, to the whole rest of the family. but he saves it in the end though. hmm

Well...also would like to say that id want to know a lot more about what you think is fake & in what area these CIA-fakes are doin what to mess it up. But i see it comin ; )

Problem is with something like this, like mentioned above, that people rely on this or that specific person that "woke them up" to keep on keeping them awake, when most arent really awake in the first place(incl. me). But when you say it to these people that their person of favor is a doubtful character, then its like tellin some fan that his favorite rockband are a bunch of fakers. And if it sinks in too much they start to worry about all the records and gear they bought with this group, while gettin mad cause they still like their music

[kathy]

Hi V

We are aware of the Loftus story but there is just not enough time to get to everything. It's interesting that different varieties of the same story end up being featured on Fox and on Alex Jones. It all ends up floating the idea that the intel boys thought they had a double agent but he was working for Osama all along. But because that can't be proved wither way the London bombing controversy is reduced to speculation over this one issue.

The way I see it is that people need to begin setting their own alarm clocks instead of relying on others to wake them up all the time because what happens if the person they rare relying on are asleep themselves ;-)

Kathy

[kismet]

Hi Fintan. After reading your views on who was behind 9-11 I have some questions for you.

You said that behind 9-11 is the "American establishment" as the guiding hands with "broad CFR/corporate support".

I wonder how many people could be trusted to go along with 9-11 and then keep quiet about it. Anyone who would plan such a thing and let others in on it, if those "others" were all extremely wealthy people with a LOT to lose if they ever became exposed as willing participants; would have to be certifiably insane to allow a large circle of people in on the plan. Whom could they trust with their lives?

My point is that an operation like 9-11 from a planners perspective would be best accomplished with a minimum of people involved. The more people that know about the plan the greater the danger of being blackmailed, betrayed, reported on, etc.

So the person or persons who came up with the plan would be very very careful to limit the amount of people that would be in the know.

Your claim that the "establishment" with "broad support" as being involved leaves me wondering just what you mean by that.

To me it seems more likely that a small group of people hired highly trained mercenaries for the job without those mercenaries knowing who hired them. That makes more sense to me then going about it with many people having foreknowledge. It would definitely have needed Cheney to be one of the conspirators, Duhbya could have been left out with no problems, or he could be involved as well. To my way of thinking there would be very few people who knew beforehand that 9-11 was being conjured up by the big boys. Just who else besides Cheney was involved? Who knows? His social and business circle is as wide as it is ugly.

For that reason I can't agree with you that government organizations are involved in psyops by spreading various conspiracy theories around on the net and in books. People with respectable well payed jobs with pensions and benefits would not be trusted to that work, loose lips sink ships. Again, the safest method of carrying out those types of operations would be through people who were outsiders, hired guns who were unaware of who hired them and why. They would be told that they were hired to "expose" this or that because their employer wanted to get out "the truth".

From a planners perspective that seems a safer route to go. What do you think?

[thebeat]

I realize that the above post was directed to Fintan. I don't wish to circumvent his response. However, the question is very old and has been answered many times. Allow me to give the most common answer. Fintan can agree or not, at his disgression.

In any psyops operation, you NEVER want EVERYONE to know all aspects of the operation, regardless of the operation. This would spell the end of the operation, regardless of what it was about. NO ONE should know ANY MORE than their particular part, PERIOD. In this regard, the 9/11 operation ran to perfection. NO ONE knew any more than what they absolutely needed to know to accomplish their role. They certainly could not comment on the other aspects of the operation, since they were entirely clueless.

Undercover operations ALWAYS work in this way. To work any other way would be ludicrous. Let's assume that EVERY SINGLE MEMBER KNOWS EVERYTYHING ABOUT ALL THE OTHER MEMBERS. Then we are at the mercy of ANYONE who breaks with the group and wants to turn the rest in. That is totally insane and goes against ALL undercover codes.

THINK!!!!!

[wowposter]

Wan Moshou game, to (wow power leveling) site to buy the cheapest gold coins! To (wow gold) for the best Dailian upgrade!

[jakjef]

a few years ago, when i first woke up, i felt the need to tell others. they say the same thing,"its just the internet, dont be stupid" that sort of thing. why do most folks have that mentality? now i just keep shut about the subject and am carefull what i say even to my daughter, but i am planning on waking her when she is old enough (she is 14) . do you think alex jones needs protection? thanks for your kindness in sharing all that you do. i will be in touch