the dark brown river

Tuesday, October 24, 2006

wake up pat kenny.

an e mail to the pat kenny show -

pat kenny :

tom clonan ducked your unexpected question about WTC7,
the third tower which fell on 9/11.

the following facts may be relevant :

the tenants of the collapsed WTC7 included offices of the
SEC - securities and exchange commission - the people who
investigate dodgy share dealings, and the FBI - who
investigate dodgy people in general.

the occupants of the section of the pentagon that was
hit by an explosion - alleged to be of a hi-jacked airliner -
included a large number of budget analysts, people who
keep track of military spending. they had been recently
and temporarily moved to the section that was hit.

in photographs released of the explosion at the pentagon,
the colour of the initial fireball is different from the colour
of the explosion of aircraft fuel seen at the south tower of the
world trade centre. be that as it may, the flight 77 aircraft
is missing, and the passenger list included naval and
pentagon personnel. this passenger list also included yet
another pentagon budget analyst, bryan jack, 48.

on the 10th of september, donald rumsfeld made a
speech in which he revealed that 2.3 trillion dollars, that
is $2,300,000,000,000., of the pentagon budget could
not be accounted for. this news was buried in the media,
understandably, by the following day's events.

$100 dollar bank notes weigh very little. it takes $100 million
dollars in such bills to amount to a tonne of paper. for those
who have difficulty visualising large numbers - if you assembled
this total discrepancy in $100 bills the pentagon had misplaced
twenty three thousand tonnes of money in the relevant period.

if you still don't know how much money that is - if you put such
a sum on deposit at two and a half per cent, the interest alone
would be a tonne and a half of hundred dollar bills, not per
year, but per day.

there was one other thing missing on 9/11. a 1933 'double
eagle', a coin of great value to collectors because almost
all that were minted were melted down again. the last
example sold made $5.9 million. one specimen was kept
in the treasury vaults of WTC7. the one in WTC7 was
removed to fort knox in july 2001.

pure gold melts at 1063 degrees centigrade.

Sunday, October 22, 2006

the path to war.

tony blair's path to war was simply in support of
president bush.

blair hoped for two (shallow) benefits in return for
this -

1. an electoral 'falklands effect' similar to that
achieved by margaret thatcher.

2. to follow john major into the carlyle group - with
which the bush family have influence - and to tour
america (where he is popular), with cherie, after leaving

he also was cowed by the 9/11 events. it did not
take his experts long to work out, like the french
and germans and russians, that the official story of
9/11 was impossible. he baulked at the unpredictable
consequences of unmasking the perpetrators.

history will not be kind to mr blair. a bankrupt who
dithers about his legacy ? he has left his army up
the euphrates without a return ticket. bush and blair
took their foreign policy from karl rove and alistair
campbell. they didn't listen to the mutterings of their
own generals.

they should haul saddam hussein out of gaol, get
him a new uniform, dust him down, give him back
his medals, apologise, and ask him politely -

'how the hell do you run this country ?'

Sunday, October 15, 2006

swansong ?

bush, cock of the walk,
and blair, his sidekick/chickenhawk,
squawked the squawk -
but never walked the walk.

now, each a lame duck,
just stuck.

Saturday, October 07, 2006

either a conspiracy - or a conspiracy.

the events of 9/11 were obviously the result of a conspiracy.
the attacks were either a conspiracy - or a conspiracy. the
outcome was 'mission accomplished' - for somebody.

the idea of the attack may not have been dreamed up by
saddam hussein, as fantasised by some conspiracy theories -
it may not have been dreamed up by hani hanjour, and it may
not have been dreamed up by marvin bush, but it must have
been dreamed up by somebody, by more than one person.
it was a conspiracy. it was not a coincidence. it was not a
series of accidents.

certain things seem obvious, regardless of who planned it. for
one thing, the plan appears to have run late. for either kind of
conspirators, long attack times were undesirable. for friends of
hani hanjour, the big question would be, 'how long before the
fighter planes show up ?' for the friends of marvin bush the
question becomes - 'how long have we got before people get
suspicious about the absence of fighter planes ?'

unresponsive and off-course planes were in the sky for an hour
or more, so surely the plan ran late ? it may have simply been
the late take off of flight 93 - these things happen - but in that
case we are looking at a complex and interconnected plan, not
just four separate attacks. why else would flight 77, real or faked,
be late arriving over the pentagon ?

if the friends of hani hanjour staged the attacks, afterwards
they were going to be dead. if the friends of marvin bush staged
the attacks, afterwards they would have to be prepared for a
major cover up, and an enquiry. the best person to handle an
enquiry would be one of themselves. from their viewpoint it
would be obvious that the person in charge of the subsequent
enquiry would need to be a key conspirator. if that person were
not aware of all aspects of the conspiracy - how would he know
what information, and which characters, to protect ? the person
to control the enquiry would have to be selected and agreed on

in the event the enquiry was headed by thomas kean, of fiduciary
trust international. this company had offices in the south tower of
the world trade centre, just a few floors below where it was struck
by the second plane. (the second plane was the 'star' of the 9/11
show, and this was bound to be so, unless the attacks on the two
towers had been almost simultaneous. this would be the case
regardless of the identity of the conspirators. some of the cameras
trained on the first strike were bound to capture the second.)

anne tatlock, the c e o of fiduciary trust, was away in offut air
force base, omaha, nebraska, on september 11th. so was
warren buffet the investor. so, later in the day, was george bush.

warren buffet's investment portfolio went up, not down, after the
attacks. this does not indicate conspiracy, but neither does it
contradict the faint possibility of foreknowledge.

fiduciary trust was up and running again very quickly, having
backed up all of its data, and having a well prepared emergency
plan and procedures. as in the case of warren buffet, this does
not indicate being forewarned, but neither does it contradict the
possibility of foreknowledge.

similarly, after the 1993 attack on the world trade centre, fiduciary
trust was up and running again within one hour - even before the
cause of the power failure was known to be a bomb. that was pretty

the 1993 attack was also a conspiracy - either way. from that point,
in 1993, it became possible for interested parties - government,
terrorists, owners, occupiers, insurers - to visualise the possibility :
'what would have happened if the tower had fallen ?' almost
certainly private meetings would have been held by some of these
interested parties to consider that question.

one of the people who responded to that attack was a jewish
academic, philip d zelikow, who wrote an article published in 1998
entitled - 'catastrophic terrorism, tackling the new danger.'

zelikow was later appointed executive director of the commission
of enquiry into 9/11 and may well have held the real power within
the commission, with kean as a front man. in effect, zelikow had
begun to write about the catastrophic attack upon the world trade
centre in 1998 before it happened. he had dared to imagine the
'transforming event' - the attack that would be the 'new pearl
harbour' for the neo conservatives.

also following on from the 1993 attack on the world trade centre
a further question would sooner rather than later have occurred
to the owners and insurers of the buildings -
'if the twin towers ever become obsolete or unprofitable, how
will they be demolished, and who will insure the demolition ?'
regardless of any conspiracy or attack, the eventual demolition
of the towers was going to be a headache.

in 2004 a block which was part of the world trade centre was
rebuilt. the old, demolished 'world trade centre 7' had 47 storeys
in 570 feet, or 12 feet per storey approximately. this reconstructed
'world trade centre 7' has 50 storeys in 750 feet, or 15 feet per
storey approximately - three feet in the difference. this is because
of modern underfloor computer wiring requirements. that is why
the twin towers were becoming obsolete, and would have become
impossible to maintain - or to demolish either, for that matter. they
was unsuited to modern concentrations of computers. as for a
demolition, who would insure it ? the hazards were unprecedented.

so we do not know who the conspirators were, but we do know
who were the interested parties. we can call them the friends
of hani hanjour and the friends of marvin bush, and we also have
to add to these interested parties a third group - we could call them
the friends of larry silverstein, for convenience. the property people.

there are also the interests of those who make the foreign policies
of the state of israel, in that any terrorist attack by muslim arabs
would be bound put the focus of american anger upon israel's rivals
for regional power in the middle east. we could call these the friends
of benjamin netanyahu.

finally there are the interests of the pentagon, and the military /
industrial complex that benefits from 'the enterprise' - the massive
flow of tax dollars into the whole range of defence projects and
military expenditure. call these the friends of 'the enterprise.'

n.b. all of the above are listed as interested parties, not guilty parties.

it is not necessary to hit one's head off the brick walls of the 'official
version' or the 'conspiracy theories.' certain things are fairly clear
either way. possible future attacks must have been under consideration
in the minds of certain of the above interested parties at least since the
previous attack in 1993.

long in preparation, the actual attacks probably ran over schedule on
the day. we are talking about a conspiracy - but the existence of that
conspiracy does not then exclude a malfunction, or a cock-up, a coup,
a counter-coup, insider dealing, an insurance scam, or even deliberate
removal of a 1933 double eagle coin from the vaults of world trade
centre 7 to the safety of fort knox.

the double collapse of the twin towers was going to be a 'world
spectacular' even if it had been a regular demolition job. everyone
would have had many years to consider the implications. it was
always going to be big. it was always going to be on television. the
obsolescent world trade towers had to come down one day. they
might even have decided to give mayor giuliani the privilege of
pressing the button.