Reddit mentions: The best terrorism books

https://vgy.me/28PP8n.jpg

​

How sadly disingenuous that Richard Gage continues to lead the gullible into an endless maze to cover up the classified technology that dustified the World Trade Center.

​

CONSIDER THE 9/11 BIBLE

​

https://vgy.me/rdJ9xg.jpg

​

Words from Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount, in the Gospel of Matthew, were found by a firefighter in March 2002, under the Tully Road, a temporary truck route that covered the last remnants of the south tower. The pages of the Bible in which they were printed had fused to a chunk of steel as the World Trade Center turned to dust in mid-air, to be found only months later.

​

“You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I tell you not to resist an evildoer. On the contrary, whoever slaps you on the right cheek, turn the other to him as well. If anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, let him have your coat as well. And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go two with him. Give to the person who asks you for something, and do not turn away from the person who wants to borrow something from you.”

​

The fabric of the human mind is flexible, but the strings of credulity can only stretch out so far, and then incredulity settles in. The image above depicts an artifact residing in the 9/11 Museum of an open Bible fused to a hunk of steel wreckage, with some of the steel overlapping the pages after it was softened by a type of directed energy. How could this happen and not have burned the paper yet the result can clearly be seen?

​

The autoignition point of paper has a range of from 440 – 470°F, depending on the type of paper. Steel melts at 2500°F. How then, did this artifact of Bible pages become “fused” with steel, without the paper combusting into a blackened mass of ashes?

​

Revisit that day, and remember all the images of showers of paper floating down through the air and scattering all over the sidewalks and streets, when the towers were destroyed. These papers were intact and surely not burned. What process was at work that could turn steel and concrete towers to dust, and yet not affect paper?

​

A process used in directed energy technology can cause a dissociation and alteration of the molecular structure of metal, to fuse with combustible objects and appear as if the materials melted together, but with no discernible evidence of heat or combustion.

​

So evidently, a technology exists which can accomplish those results, the results seen in the Bible papers fused to the steel. This is not a miracle, other than this technology being able to appear miraculous to most people. Arthur C. Clarke once opined: “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” Other forces were at work the day of 9/11, other than magic or the hand of the Divine.

​

Very much related to this anomalous artifact in the 9/11 Museum, is another one found in the ruins of an almost forgotten and seldom mentioned building which was immediately destroyed on the morning of 9/11.

​

St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox church, just across the street from the south side of the South Tower, or WTC-2. When retrieval of the relics in the church was undertaken in the following days, only a few pieces survived and one find was called a miracle. “The great miracle, was the recovery of an icon of St. Spyridon. The silver around the icon had melted, but the paper icon had not been burnt.”

​

https://vgy.me/toY1uh.jpg

​

This discovery was one of the church’s most holy relics, and it was declared a miracle because the silver onlay applied to a paper icon of St. Spyridon had “dustified”, leaving the paper intact and unscorched. The melting point of silver is 1,763°F.

​

The best collection of evidence making the case for a directed energy technology at work and used as a weapon on 9/11, can be found at the website of Judy Wood, Ph.D - and in her landmark book: ”Where Did The Towers Go?”.

​

A copy of the book is available at The Library of Congress.

​

https://lccn.loc.gov/2010916516

​

Or, you have the option of purchasing a copy from Amazon.

​

https://www.amazon.com/Towers-Evidence-Directed-Free-energy-Technology/dp/0615412564

​

This download is the Foreword and book review of "WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO?" by Eric Larsen, Professor Emeritus at John Jay College of Criminal Justice 1971 - 2006 (35 years), plus the Author's Preface.

​

http://www.checktheevidence.com/pdf/Where%20Did%20The%20Towers%20Go%20-%20Dr%20Judy%20Wood.pdf

Ah, found it, it took me a long time to actually hunt for your source, in the future if you wouldn't mind linking them, that would be great, it makes the actual process of rebutting a bit easier. Also, if you'd like to actually update your religion percentages, I can hook you up there too. The CIA World Factbook isn't exactly a hidden arcane text that we can't Google in six seconds. But lets jump into the meat of your argument, because it's an interesting one given that it provides no sources and just wants me to take what it says at face value.

Starting from the bottom, working to the top, as you'd expect the correlation to run strongest at the bottom:

Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, and Yemen are all in relatively bad spots, but of course your source only lists a "variety of reasons". Failing rather impressively to touch upon the fact that some of these places weren't so bad before being thrust into the heart of a decades long series of proxy wars (Russian Invasion, American Invasion, etc.). I'll give you saudi Arabia though, it has an honest to God functioning government, and that Government is a hell hole for human rights. Note that people aren't exactly slaughtering each other in the streets with impunity as your source seems to suggest is happening, but there are deep issues. Even if there have been interesting signs of change.

The 80% bracket suggests state run ethnic cleansing and genocide, which seems a bit disingenuous. The Armenian Genocide is the only event I can think of that would qualify for the listed countries, and it wasn't religiously motivated, but rather as a consolidation of political and geographic power. Palestine isn't even a country and is in the process of being actively repressed by Israel, not the other way around. Why the hell is Gaza listed separately of Palestine anyway? But I digress. Indonesia has had some interesting run ins with Sharia law that the world continues to monitor but ethnic cleansing is a bit overstated, and their new president is making strides in the name of freedom of religion and freedom of expression.

Look, this is a fine and dandy exercise, but the basic plotline is - this source overstates at every level as a form of fear mongering, and rather than hold a rational conversation about the problems these areas are facing, what the root cause is and how we can approach the situation successfully, you've decided the root cause is clearly Islam. I hope that we never hit a point in this country where that becomes the primary view, the potential for loss is too great.

Edit - I'd like to add in Amazon's tagline for the book that the original quotes come from, Slavery, Terrorism, and Islam: The Historic Roots and Contemporary Threat by Peter Hammond - which was originally published in 2005, so I'm now not entirely sure where it managed to get its hands on 2007 numbers....

>A fascinating, well illustrated and thoroughly documented response to the relentless anti-Christian propaganda that has been generated by Muslim and marxist groups and by Hollywood film makers. As Karl Marx declared: "The first battlefield is the re-writing of history!" "Slavery, Terrorsim and Islam" is an eye opening, positive and practical handbook to empower you to respond effectively to the challenge of Islam today.

Yeah, that source sounds like an unbiased fact finding mission.

> Very few states have been founded through exclusively peaceful means.

This is true. None of them should be exempted from criticism and they should be challenged when they deny the violence of their foundation. Here are some examples of anti-racist content critical of Israel from r/conspiracy:

This is a picture of 20,000 Orthodox Jews (ignored by the MSM) protesting Israel in NYC, these
are some photos of the Israeli apartheid alongside the Nazi holocaust, this is an example of Israeli false flag terrorism, and this is a report that two Israeli companies helped the NSA bug the U.S.

There are Israeli shills. The government of Israel has gone public about this. But it's not just Israel, the U.S. military is doing this too.

And if we take a look at current affairs, we see Israel, the U.S. and Saudi Arabia are [manipulating events](http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/08/16/318941/the-axis-of-evil/
) in Egypt to their mutual benefit while Israeli soldiers are making pancakes of Rachel Corrie, an American peace activist murdered by the IDF.

> The partition plan was the UN's proposal for how to get the British out. Neither the British or the UN made even a token attempt to enforce it. And the conflict had been in a state of open war for years before the partition plan. Hell, the british were still nominally in charge until 1948, but the war was already well under way then. And the british certainly didn't bother helping the jews out, as the wikipedia article you linked states.

I'm not claiming the british are the good guys here. The partition plan did more than get the british out, it also gave most of palestine to israel and resulted in the exodus of hundreds of thousands of people and many deaths.

> So...academic freedom is unlimited? It's wrong for universities to discipline faculty no matter their opinion? What if a professor is an avowed Nazi? Calls for mass murder? Teaches creationism in Bio 101? I see no reason that professors should be allowed to do anything in the name of academic freedom. I agree that professors should be allowed to speak their opinions outside lecturing, but freedom to do anything remotely academic seems ridiculous to me.

No, this is a strawperson and a slippery slope and not what I'm saying. The book I linked you to discussed the loyalty-oath and free-speech controversies at the University of California, the tortured relationship between universities and the government as seen in language acquisition programs, and the policing of thought in the academy in relation to the Middle East. To take just one example, the former President of Harvard, Larry Summers, claimed that criticism of Israel is anti-semitic "in effect, if not intent." Chomsky's unwillingness to study whether 9/11 was an inside job is another example. And here's a very recent example: Alice Walker being barred from speaking at the University of Michigan due to her views on Israel.

> Did you read the article? He didn't face issues because he threatened the establishment, he faced legal problems because he was sued for libel by the brigade he accused of massacring people. He was then unable to show a significant amount of evidence for his claims. His only evidence was recordings from people who were children in the village, which he appears to have filtered and possibly fabricated--no documents, no Israeli corroboration, etc. His consequence was...having his MA temporarily retracted. Even though his revised thesis had the same problems, he still got a weird quasi-MA out of it.

Yes, I read the article. This is a misleading and inaccurate narrative. Before the trial began, Katz attempted to have the case dismissed, arguing that the content of an academic thesis should be the subject of scholarly debate, and should not be placed under the purview of a legal proceeding. Haifa University did not support this effort. In fact, they offered no legal or practical assistance whatever, and instead quickly moved to erase Katz's name from the list of graduating students to be awarded honors. Senior professors at Haifa University involved in providing scholarly scaffolding for the Zionist narrative lobbied the university to withhold support for Katz.

Katz himself could not afford an attorney, and, besides help from his cousin, his legal team was organized pro bono by a Palestinian NGO in Israel. At the same time, he encountered various forms of pressure in the kibbutz where he lived, from friends, family, and neighbors. Under these conditions, the middle-aged Katz suffered a stroke in the weeks before the trial.

In defense of his thesis, Katz had to choose between two arguments: either he had told the truth and his research conveyed the fact of the massacre, or he had at least acted in "good faith" and even if his research was found to be lacking he had never had any intention to libel. Katz was represented by five lawyers—only one of these lawyers (who also happened to be Katz’s cousin) pressured him to adopt the "good faith" defense, with the aim of "minimizing the political nature of the case." The others had hoped to use the trial as a public venue for discussion of Israel’s role in the violence of the Nakba, an unprecedented prospect. Although Katz had, in conversation with his legal team, initially agreed to defend that he had spoken the truth, he decided at the last minute to adopt the "good faith" defense.

During the cross-examination, the prosecutors scrutinized only six of Katz's references out of two-hundred and thirty in total. One member of Katz's legal team exhibited 'exultation' at the conclusion of the prosecution's case, and eagerly anticipated their opportunity to present the defense. After two days of cross-examination by the plaintiff’s lawyer, Katz agreed to a settlement, issued a public apology renouncing his thesis, and the veterans dropped the suit. A lawyer from Haifa University appeared to hint to Katz that settling the case and admitting wrongdoing would enable him to resume his studies. Given the pressure to which he was subjected from within the community of the kibbutz and the overwhelming conditions of uncertainty surrounding his future livelihood, it is not surprising that Katz leapt at the opportunity.

Sources:

Ilan Pappe, Israeli historian and socialist activist, professor with the College of Social Sciences and International Studies at the University of Exeter in the United Kingdom, director of the university's European Centre for Palestine Studies, and co-director of the Exeter Centre for Ethno-Political Studies: http://www.palestine-studies.org/journals.aspx?id=4227&jid=1&href=fulltext

Samera Esmeir, Professor of Rhetoric at UC Berkeley: http://www.deepdyve.com/lp/duke-university-press/1948-law-history-memory-KtvBPC56Ku

The Cell Phone Calls made/received, on 9/11...wtf?!!!

It has to be placed in the overall context of the impossible cell phone calls, then the entire content and delivery of her call, to that final whisper, begins to make perfect sense but which doesn't and seems highly incongruent if the official story were accepted.

Listen to the voicemail message by scrolling about half way down Wikipedia's flight 93 page to locate the soundfile player under her name CeeCee Lyles on the right hand side. Plug in your headphones, turn up the volume and, like she says at the outset - listen VERY carefully to the whole call.

Edit to add: For anyone who's interested in some deep research regarding the entire "passenger" phone record on 9/11 which the Zelikow led 9/11 Commission relied heavily upon for it's "investigative" report/"narrative", I highly recommend the following book:

Hijacking America's Mind on 9/11: Counterfeiting Evidence

What's wrong with Muslims? As human beings, nothing. All my Muslim friends go out of their way to be friendly and hospitable. I have no issue with their friendliness. We have legendary superficial conversations.

It's when we discuss non-trivial things like freedom of speech (Western pluralistic society's freedom to publicly criticize Mohammad and Islam), the place of women in society (women's equality, whether a wife is obligated to obey her husband, and whether a husband has the right to strike his wife or to demand sex of her whenever he wants), and their opinion of homosexuals and what should be done with them, that their teeth come out.

Want to know what they really think? Ask them what the Koran says about these things and, assuming they don't flat out lie to you, watch them squirm. They believe that the Koran is the perfect, unchangeable, literal word of Allah, and the Koran is NOT ambivalent about any of these things. Did you catch that? it cannot be changed. There is no such thing as reforming Islam because that is explicitly forbidden, in the Koran.

Muslims have sharia law, which is a summarized collection of the commands from Allah on how they need to live, and more importantly, how they need to make the world become. Muslims believe they have to ultimately establish sharia over the entire world, whether the world wants it or not. Of course they don't do that immediately; they wait until they have enough numbers in any given area to ensure they won't get much resistance.

This is an amazing short summary of different surveys regarding what Muslims really think on some important issues

The following is taken from this site, which is itself adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond's book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat:

Islam is not a religion nor is it a cult. It is a complete system.

Islam has religious, legal, political, economic and military components. The religious component is a beard for all the other components.

Islamization occurs when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their so-called 'religious rights.'

When politically correct and culturally diverse societies agree to 'the reasonable' Muslim demands for their 'religious rights,' they also get the other components under the table. Here's how it works (percentages source CIA: The World Fact Book (2007)).

As long as the Muslim population remains around 1% of any given country they will be regarded as a peace-loving minority and not as a threat to anyone. In fact, they may be featured in articles and films, stereotyped for their colorful uniqueness:

United States -- Muslim 1.0%
Australia -- Muslim 1.5%
Canada -- Muslim 1.9%
China -- Muslim 1%-2%
Italy -- Muslim 1.5%
Norway -- Muslim 1.8%

At 2% and 3% they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs:

Denmark -- Muslim 2%
Germany -- Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7%
Spain -- Muslim 4%
Thailand -- Muslim 4.6%

From 5% on they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population.

They will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature it on their shelves -- along with threats for failure to comply. ( United States ).

France -- Muslim 8%
Philippines -- Muslim 5%
Sweden -- Muslim 5%
Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands -- Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad &Tobago -- Muslim 5.8%

At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islam is not to convert the world but to establish Sharia law over the entire world.

When Muslims reach 10% of the population, they will increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions ( Paris --car-burnings). Any non-Muslim action that offends Islam will result in uprisings and threats ( Amsterdam - Mohammed cartoons).

Guyana -- Muslim 10%
India -- Muslim 13.4%
Israel -- Muslim 16%
Kenya -- Muslim 10%
Russia -- Muslim 10-15%

After reaching 20% expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings and church and synagogue burning:

Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8%

At 40% you will find widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks and ongoing militia warfare:

Bosnia -- Muslim 40%
Chad -- Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon -- Muslim 59.7%

From 60% you may expect unfettered persecution of non-believers and other religions, sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels:

Albania -- Muslim 70%
Malaysia -- Muslim 60.4%
Qatar -- Muslim 77.5%
Sudan -- Muslim 70%

After 80% expect State run ethnic cleansing and genocide:

Bangladesh -- Muslim 83%
Egypt -- Muslim 90%
Gaza -- Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1%
Iran -- Muslim 98%
Iraq -- Muslim 97%
Jordan -- Muslim 92%
Morocco -- Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan -- Muslim 97%
Palestine -- Muslim 99%
Syria -- Muslim 90%
Tajikistan -- Muslim 90%
Turkey -- Muslim 99.8%
United Arab Emirates -- Muslim 96%

100% will usher in the peace of 'Dar-es-Salaam' -- the Islamic House of Peace -- there's supposed to be peace because everybody is a Muslim:

Afghanistan -- Muslim 100%
Saudi Arabia -- Muslim 100%
Somalia -- Muslim 100%
Yemen -- Muslim 99.9%

Of course, that's not the case. To satisfy their blood lust, Muslims then start killing each other for a variety of reasons.

'Before I was nine I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; and the tribe against the world and all of us against the infidel. – Leon Uris, 'The Haj'

It is good to remember that in many, many countries, such as France, the Muslim populations are centered around ghettos based on their ethnicity. Muslims do not integrate into the community at large. Therefore, they exercise more power than their national average would indicate.

Edit:

The best thing you can do is to educate yourself on the matter. The second best thing you can do is to tell others.

The myth of the tiny radical Muslim minority

/r/IslamUnveiled

Sebastian Gorka on Jihad and what can be done about it.

Political Islam has subjugated civilizations for 1400 years

Islam Q&A part 1

Farrah Prudence's youtube channel

Other useful links:

http://www.clarionproject.org/

http://www.raymondibrahim.com/

https://www.cspii.org/en/articles/

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Main_Page

https://www.jihadwatch.org/

/r/exmuslim

Sister_Lauren, as I've told you before, you are the only other one here who admits to agreeing with me.

And it's actually quite strange, because I don't have a vested interest in the nuke hypothesis and thus it makes no difference to me whether people agree with it or they don't.

The problem, I suppose, is I don't support the thermite/nanothermite theory or Judy Wood's DEW theory, although I don't think anyone here supports that. If they do I've certainly not heard it mentioned. Btw, except for her DEW theory, I think Wood's book is excellent, by far the best written description of the demolition of the towers there is, and I would strongly recommend that everyone reads it.

http://www.amazon.com/Towers-Evidence-Directed-Free-energy-Technology/dp/0615412564

>What is presented in this book is not a theory and it is not speculation. It is evidence. It is the body of empirical evidence that must be explained in order to determine what happened at Ground Zero.

To know what I'm talking about, just read some of the reviews.

This is an excellent overview, thanks. For those interested in the serious study of this subject, Olson's Fair Play and To Catch a Spy rank among the best books on intelligence I have ever read. The notes and bibliographies alone are worth the price.

That's because Al Franken actually treats women with respect and the media is conveniently leaving out the career history of his accuser.

His accuser appeared in Playboy in 1996 and 2011, and you can (try to) order copies from third-party sellers on Amazon.

• https://www.amazon.com/Playboy-Magazine-August-Leeann-Tweeden/dp/B01MZ7GEU0 (not nude)
  
  
• https://www.amazon.com/Playboy-Adult-Magazine-December-2011/dp/B007P732J2 (nude)
  
  In addition, here are other highlights of her career (pun not intended):
  
  
• At a 2004 Maxim party with the headlights out.
  http://m.zimbio.com/photos/Leeann+Tweeden/Maxim+s+Super+Bowl+Party/pZpIqr_n7EN
  
  
• 2006 Stuff magazine editorial for NASCAR
  
  
• Suggestive photo with quote in FHM that she's "up for sex wherever".
  https://goo.gl/images/FtEZeg
  
  
• Multiple FHM covers: 2003, 2005, and 2007.
  
  
• On a USO tour, dressed to show off her mind. https://goo.gl/images/E3x8cZ
  
  
• Not sure what's going on with this one. Honestly looks like a soldier is trying to block her breasts from his field of view. https://goo.gl/images/NYRFc6
  
  
• And here she is on Howard Stern giggling about questions about her breast implants and how hot she is. She said she dressed in a sexy way for him. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1ogwuJ2fAo
  
  My point is not that she cannot complain. That's her right. But Dave Chappelle said it best: some women send confusing messages to men. "Just because I'm dressed this way doesn't make me a whore." "No, but you are wearing a whore's uniform."
  
  Given her work history, I kind of feel like she's ok with the faux groping and the ogling, when it's low-risk and she's the center of attention. I think this is all a political attempt to try to unbalance the Senate, since Ray Moore may lose. Plus, the actual pictures of the skit look pretty tame.

Some great history books:

1. A Short History of Nearly Everything
   
   
2. Stalingrad
   
   
3. The Interrogators
   
   
4. On Roads
   
   The first and last are not military history but are quite a good and different reads for someone interested in history and facts.

Thank you for providing this. Reddit has been invaded with skeptics.
Recently reading "Money Mafia" by Paul Hellyer revealed an interesting trick in the book for 9.11: The use of free energy devices (akin to Tesla's beam weapons) that completely annihilate materials and turns them into dust. I have yet to check out the book. "

EDIT: I just found out Judy Wood, the Author of the book has a website.

http://drjudywood.com

They didn't "come to America," but yes of course the conflict between the United States and the Islamic world started before the events you outlined. I'll outline the relevant points as summarily as I can. For brevity, I will include history only related to the United States and not broader Western civilization. The case of the United States is salient and representative.

History of Islam: Muhammad to 1776

Muhammad first began teaching among Pagan Arabs who were more or less friendly until he began to teach that there is only one God and all other religions' followers shall burn in hell. When they began to threaten him and his people, he fled to Mecca and Medina, subsequently taking over the western half of Saudi Arabia along with the eastern tip (Oman). Almost all secular scholars of the Qur'an agree that it is as much a political guidebook (how to run a society) as a religious text (how to be a good person). Upon his death in 632, his followers interpreted the book as they did, and a system of Caliphates began to rule the Islamic world. By 661, all of what we call the Middle East and northeastern Africa was under the Caliphate. By the 8th century, the Caliphate had extended to include land from Spain to Pakistan. This was unsustainable militarily (given few people liked being ruled under Islamic law), so it was pulled back. The Turkish peoples were to become the new military force of the Caliphate, and took Constantinople just before Columbus "found" the "New World." When the United States declared independence, Abdul Hamid I was sultan, with even Baghdad under his rule (that article makes him sound friendlier than he actually was -- he was compelled to sign treaties after military defeats).

Barbary Slaves and Pirating

Before the United States had first elected Washington as President, the Congress found itself at odds with the Caliphate controlled lands. At this time, the Muslim world was taking Europeans and Americans as slaves, estimates are that as many as 1.25 million slaves were taken from the Western world (source: Robert Davis). John Adams, America's London ambassador, was sent to the Tripoli ambassador to discuss the matter, and was met with a demand of money for various levels of peace. Terms were set for the release of slaves, short term peace, and even a price for long term peace. The United States argued that it was a new nation. If their military had previously quarreled with Europe, that was of no concern to the United States. Could not peace with a new nation be had?

When Jefferson took the Presidency in 1801, he was immediately met with a demand of $4,000,000 (adjusted for inflation but not %GDP or federal budget) to be paid to the Muslim lands. Jefferson demanded repeatedly to know by what right these demands were made. By what right did they capture Americans as slaves, seize her ships, take her property, and demand payment in exchange?

> The Ambassador answered us that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners.

Thomas Jefferson to Congress and the State Department

Barbary Wars to Usama bin Laden

President Jefferson found himself in the fortunate position of having a capable Navy that he, ironically enough, had fought against funding before being elected. With it, he began the first conflict between the United States and the Caliphate. The second line of the Marine Anthem (To the shores of Tripoli) celebrates the result even today. Congress authorized Jefferson to use the full might of the United States Navy to suppress the military aggression, with permission to seize and destroy property as the Navy was able. The language was quite strong and general.

The modern Islamic revival that began in the 1970s has seen a large surge in the total Muslim population, which we must admit is in some sense responsible for the recent surge of the lower jihad as well (this being the military jihad as opposed to the higher jihad meaning an inner struggle). Al Qaeda's number one demand was restoration of the Caliphate. The crime for which America has been subject to the violence from the radical Islamists was committed after approval by the Saudi royal family to use American troops to free Kuwait from Iraq rather than using their own, limited resources and relying heavily on the local mujahidin. In other words, Usama bin Laden was angry with America because he thought that local insurgents could fight Saddam the same way they had in Afghanistan against the Soviets rather than relying on smart bombs to do the same. (He forgot, or perhaps never knew, that Afghanistan was liberated only through American assistance. People who assert the unsophisticated non-distinction between Al Qaeda and the Taliban forget this. America gave aid to the Taliban, not The Base.)

Also central to crimes committed by the United States in Bin Laden's mind was our admission that we had begun to support the right of East Timor to self determination of government. Here is one of his first speeches after the 2001 attacks.. Ctrl+f "east timor" to see that his complaint is that the Caliphate's maximum extent is no longer in effect, with the world recognizing that the military devastation committed by Indonesia was invalid.

Specific Points: Iran in WWII, The Taliban, Gulf War vs. bin Laden, and Diplomacy

So, yes, the Barbary wars happened before the Iranian coup. Keep in mind also that 1953 is also after 1945 when Nazi Germany surrendered. At that time, Iran was already under the full control of Britain and Russia (mostly the British), essentially a colony like India was. This invasion was necessary because Reza Shah was attempting to play neutral while supplying the Nazi war machine with crude oil necessary for its logistical world domination. "Iran" in Persian means "The Land of the Aryans," which Persia abruptly changed its name to in 1935, just as it was becoming friendly toward the Germans. After the war was over, Britain had a number of privately owned fields, purchased legally from the owners of the land. When Iran elected Mosaddegh to nationalize the oilfields, they did so illegally. Their country or not, the heart of libertarianism is the right to free exchange and free markets. Unless you agree that the United States can simply seize the property of any foreign corporation who operates in any way through the United States, you cannot support the right of anyone, anywhere to loot by law. The course of action taken by the West was perhaps morally wrong. But it was in response to a moral wrong, not the initiation of one. I find that very few internet historians know the history of Iran before 1953. This has always seemed odd to me -- where are you all getting your similarly edited information?

The military bases in Islamic lands were widely supported at the time by both governments and peoples. They still celebrate it as a national day of pride. Again, bin Laden considers this the great evil of America because he wanted the local mujahidin to fight Saddam rather than bringing in any Western aid. You may freely be against the Gulf War, but you cannot rationalize that the intervention was innately immoral since the United States determined that losing control of the Kuwait and Saudi oilfields would have been damaging to her interests. In other words, the United States did not initiate force but responded to the initiation of force upon a friend.

The United States used the Taliban to fight the Soviet Empire. I fail to see this as a moral evil.

The United States necessarily has diplomatic relations with all countries who are willing, including bad guys. Egyptians and Tunisians far and away have more warm feelings for the United States than ill-feelings. Only with sources such as Russia Today can you attempt to support the notion that we stood between these leaders and their people. The West was crucial to their overthrow, including freezing of their foreign assets.

Recommended Reading

Islamic Radicalism and Global Jihad History of radical Islam and current resurgence. Takes a look at the old scholars and new.

The Looming Tower Everything leading up to 9/11

Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters Details the Barbary coast slave trade

The Trial of Henry Kissinger Outlines US war crimes

Qur'an My English translation.

Instructions for American Servicemen in Iran During World War II Self explanatory.

The Forever War Solidly good book.

The Rape of Kuwait Iraq war crimes in Kuwait


Edits

• Corrected a couple subject-verb agreements.
  
  
• Added section headers.
  
  
• Added recommended reading list.
  
  
• Reworked a paragraph in the last section.

Here are all the local Amazon links I could find:


amazon.co.uk

amazon.ca

amazon.com.au

amazon.in

amazon.com.mx

amazon.de

amazon.it

amazon.es

amazon.com.br

amazon.nl

amazon.co.jp

Beep bloop. I'm a bot to convert Amazon ebook links to local Amazon sites.
I currently look here: amazon.com, amazon.co.uk, amazon.ca, amazon.com.au, amazon.in, amazon.com.mx, amazon.de, amazon.it, amazon.es, amazon.com.br, amazon.nl, amazon.co.jp, if you would like your local version of Amazon adding please contact my creator.

>All questions Roger Stone addressed in his live AMA now have typed out answers in the thread. During the AMA the typist fell behind but now all the questions Stone tackledduring the AMA have full answers.
>
> Mr. Stone's /r/The_Donald AMA.
> Full video AMA courtesy of Infowars.
>
> Highlights from Stone AMA.
>
>__
>_
>#Reminder that Infowars Editor at Large, Paul Joseph Watson will be here next Thursday, June 2nd for an AMA at 7PM EST. Streamed live via Infowars.
>
>
>____
>
>His articles have been featured hundreds of times on the Drudge Report and he has appeared as a guest on numerous popular radio shows, television broadcasts, and podcasts, Including RT, Coast to Coast AM, Louder With Crowder and Stefan Molyneux. He's also author of the 2003 book, Order out of Chaos.
>
>Check out:
>
> Infowars.com
> Prisonplanet.com
> Paul's Twitter
> Paul's Facebook
> Paul's YouTube
>

>All questions Roger Stone addressed in his live AMA now have typed out answers in the thread. During the AMA the typist fell behind but now all the questions Stone tackledduring the AMA have full answers.
>
> Mr. Stone's /r/The_Donald AMA.
> Full video AMA courtesy of Infowars.
>
> Highlights from Stone AMA.
>
>__
>_
>#Reminder that Infowars Editor at Large, Paul Joseph Watson will be here next Thursday, June 2nd for an AMA at 7PM EST. Streamed live via Infowars.
>
>
>____
>
>His articles have been featured hundreds of times on the Drudge Report and he has appeared as a guest on numerous popular radio shows, television broadcasts, and podcasts, Including RT, Coast to Coast AM, Louder With Crowder and Stefan Molyneux. He's also author of the 2003 book, Order out of Chaos.
>
>Check out:
>
> Infowars.com
> Prisonplanet.com
> Paul's Twitter
> Paul's Facebook
> Paul's YouTube
>

Cool man, I wouldn't be surprised if Reagan did know more, but investigators were unable to turn up any evidence, and these hearsay quotes are certainly made by people incentivized to share the blame with him.

There are so many books about the US deep state, you are in denial about this.
Top Secret America: The Rise of the New American Security State https://www.amazon.com/dp/0316182206/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_6WhgzbJRRF1S5

Yeah! He's full of them. He actually wrote a book on the moral implications of spying. It's made all the more interesting due to the fact that he's a devout Catholic.

https://www.amazon.com/Fair-Play-Moral-Dilemmas-Spying/dp/1597971537

axolotl_peyotl: ^^original ^^reddit ^^link

How much time have you spent researching the unusual nature of the collapse of the twin towers and building 7?

I totally respect your opinion, but if you want an extremely in depth analysis of this theory, I highly recommend this book. You will have to shell out $40, but you can't seriously debunk this theory without first giving it due diligence.

The pictures alone in the book are enough to convince me that some type of unconventional technology was used that day.

As for the writer of this blog, Joseph P. Farrell, he definitely knows what he is talking about, as he has written over a dozen books on off-the-books technologies and physics models that have been largely kept secret for the past 100 years.

It sounds outlandish, but again, you have to give the subject its due diligence before dismissing it completely.

How much time have you spent researching the unusual nature of the collapse of the twin towers and building 7?

I totally respect your opinion, but if you want an extremely in depth analysis of this theory, I highly recommend this book. You will have to shell out $40, but you can't seriously debunk this theory without first giving it due diligence.

The pictures alone in the book are enough to convince me that some type of unconventional technology was used that day.

As for the writer of this blog, Joseph P. Farrell, he definitely knows what he is talking about, as he has written over a dozen books on off-the-books technologies and physics models that have been largely kept secret for the past 100 years.

It sounds outlandish, but again, you have to give the subject its due diligence before dismissing it completely.

Not nearly as academic and much more tinfoil hat donning than Klein's work, but Paul Joseph Watson's Order Out of Chaos sounds more along the vein you were mentioning. He's a contributor to Alex Jones, so take it with a grain of salt. But interesting read, nonetheless.

Sorry I yelled I'm hungover, and i just realized I responded to the wrong person I'm an idiot

Start here

Continue here

Give this a once over

I'm sure there's a ton of good reads, I enjoyed this book , but I'm sure someone else can point you in a right direction

Nvm I'm going back to sleep

Well, unsurprisingly the quantity of resources not in Catalan is not great. Besides what /u/raicopk already shared in his comment, and what is available on wikipedia, if you understand Spanish this would be the most detailed source you can get:

• Terra lliure: punto de partida 1979-1995. Una biografia autorizada
  
  
• Also might be helpful to check out this paper with a similar scope:
  
  http://www.polisci.northwestern.edu/documents/undergraduate/kaitlyn-chriswell.pdf
  
  I will let you know if I come by anything else, I really thought there would be more info on the subject :\
  
  

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Visas-Al-Qaeda-Handouts-Insiders/dp/0990926206

This book is interesting, detailing the ease at which known suspects were given visas and enabled by US officials.

FYI in spycraft, generally the spies are called “officers”, and the people they recruit (to spy on their behalf) are the “agents”. A “double-agent” would describe an agent that has been re-recruited by the other side. So in the recent case it was a Russian officer who defected. There’s an interesting [book] (https://www.amazon.com/dp/1597971537/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_jQ.RAbHMWQANE) about this topic.

> He was a senior fellow for 8 months in 2013, I don't know what to make of it or if he is still connected to Brock.

It was a LOT more than that.

Before he was a Senior Fellow for 8 months, he was Executive Vice President/Senior Advisor for Media Matters for nearly 2-1/2 years.

And before that, he was Vice President for Research and Communications for Media Matters for 1-1/4 years.

He co-authored two books with David Brock: The Benghazi Hoax and The Fox Effect.

And he co-authored Lies, Incorporated: The World of Post-Truth Politics with Media Matters as recently as April 2016.

Just as Nixon's henchmen informed the young Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney, Brock will have informed the thinking of Ari Rabin-Havt in ways he may not even fully realize himself. But if he's looking for forgiveness, he should step out of politics and find another line of work. He is definitely not someone who should have Bernie's ear.

Its bullshit, the 9/11 demolition charges and the official story, that's a part of this redacted disinformation one, all to cover their tracks and put it on Saudi Arabia (no matter how hard they deserve for other things, but not this). We need to SHOW people what happened and let them use their own two eyes. Not what they've been told to believe. It was directed energy technology, For years Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth) wanted, NO BEGGED for a complete thorough exhaustive, meticulous analysis of the EVIDENCE. Put the pitchforks down, READ.


Dr. Judy Wood undertook the first and to this date ONLY complete scientific forensic analysis of the events that took place on September 11th 2001 available in the public domain.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cow8GtYkeA4&list=PLdN42gkvqb35nM6U1MIVsg7W9lDpD8HOh

https://www.amazon.com/Towers-Evidence-Directed-Free-energy-Technology/dp/0615412564/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1468613890&sr=8-1&keywords=judy+wood

FREE FROM AGENDA OR SPECULATION as to who did it, only what actually happened.

'It is an old maxim of mine that when you have excluded the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.' Sherlock Holmes

Its dustification, not pulverisation.

Your video proves my point. Go to 21:30. Not even enough rubble to fill the lobby, even though it should be at least 12 stories high.

Read this book to educate yourself.

https://www.amazon.com/Towers-Evidence-Directed-Free-energy-Technology/dp/0615412564

The author of the above text, Dr. Peter Hammond, wrote this book which contains his documentation.

Sillä nyt ei ole niin mitään väliä. Muslimien kasvavan väestönosuuden vaikutukset ei oo mitenkään epäselviä tai tuntemattomia. Edelliseltä tuhannelta vuodelta kun on olemassa heti enemmälti tietoa. Tässä vaikka aiheeseen perehtyneen tutkijan kirja. Ja synopsi.

http://www.amazon.com/Illuminating-Dark-Arts-War-Subversion/dp/1441170693

http://www.publicservice.co.uk/feature_story.asp?id=17102

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/wikipedia-founder-attacks-bell-pottinger-for-ethical-blindness-6273836.html

Yup.
https://www.amazon.com/Slavery-Terrorism-Islam-Historical-Contemporary/dp/0958454981

> Where'd you get that from?

https://www.amazon.com/Slavery-Terrorism-Islam-Revised-Expanded/dp/0980263913/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1482304133&sr=1-2

I'm still working my way through Dr Judy Wood's book:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRlYwyqDA3Y

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Towers-Evidence-Directed-Free-energy-Technology/dp/0615412564

https://www.amazon.com/Towers-Evidence-Directed-Free-energy-Technology/dp/0615412564

https://www.amazon.com/ISIS-US-Shocking-Behind-Terror/dp/1615771522

Amazon.com Link

Target America is the alternative title given to the same book.

Thank you for your comment and your service.

Curious if you've read The Interrogators: Inside the Secret War Against al Qaeda or have any thoughts on it. I'm working my way through it now.

Yeah, sometimes.

Intelligence matters

Is a book by a Dem senator about GW Bush's failures around 9/11.

A side note I picked up is that the senator was working on the Patriot Act in the 90's w/Clinton Admin because of Embassy bombings by Bin Laden and Oklahoma City wasn't some instant conspiracy by Cheney and Satan after they set up 9/11.

I don't agree with it[e-surveillance] all, but , usually these people just think they are protecting us and we do need some secrets.

What do you think of this book and theory?

If you haven't read it yet, I would be extremely interested to know what you make of it.

This theory is frowned upon by alternative media in a similar way as the snowden-as-limited-hangout theory.

I can understand using baby steps to wake up the general population, but how do we wake up those who are already truthseekers, but who may be hesitant to embrace the "wilder" conspiracy theories?

You and /u/DiscoLollipop

IIRC it's from this book: https://www.amazon.com/Slavery-Terrorism-Islam-Historical-Contemporary/dp/0958454981

>When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions. In Paris, we are already seeing car-burnings. Any non -muslim action offends Islam, and results in uprisings and threats, such as in Am- sterdam, with opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam. Such tensions are seen daily, particularly in Muslim sections,

> The comment you're responding to was in no way personal or inappropriate. The "you" was very generic.

If you keep reading, it becomes clear the opposite is true. The person very much meant it to be a personal reference. The person directly addresses me and equates his/her usage of the word 'you' in other instances as also direct addresses.

>Being harassed is not.

There was no harassment in this instance. Harassment, sexual assault, groping, etc, are not the issue here, because none such occurred. The issue is an ethics investigation.

edit:

>To my knowledge (based only on her Wikipedia entry, so I may be wrong) her nude appearance in Playboy was not until several years after the events in question anyway.

I'm going to go with this being enough to corroborate my argument, regardless of lack of nude photos.