Bob Kerrey (911 comm) admits 911 was Pre-Planned

Whatever the 30 year old conspiracy is, and if any connection to 9/11, it is a chance lost in the video, simply because of the crucial cut in the video between the two salient phrases "It's a 30 year old conspiracy" and "I'm talking about 9/11" a pity if it is just an editorial flourish. The 30 year old conspiracy remark however, is food for thought.

Originally posted by DarthChrisious
Kerry knows about conspiracies. He and his team of Navy Seals conspired with the CIA to murder over a dozen women and children in Vietnam, and then again conspired to keep that information from the American people.

As governor of Nebraska, he recruited the Omaha World-Herald to help him bring down the Koppel family - a banking family who was in Nebraska long before it was even a state and did nothing but good things - so that those bankers who contributed to his gubernatorial campaign could benefit. Associates of his (though not him directly) would later be connected to The Franklin Credit Union Scandal - a scandal involving drugs, prostitution (mostly male prostitution, which included midnight tours of the White House during the Reagan Administration), satanism, kidnapping, child slavery, and fraud.

No offense, but Bob Kerry doesn't rank real high on my credibility list.

The man may be a moral cesspool, but that gives him a little more credibility in my book. Dirt runs where the dirt flows. If he is as dirty as you say (and I have no reason to doubt that he is) then it stands to reason that he would position himself to be privy to such a long-running and wealth-producing conspiracy...

I'm not saying this is the case, but that bit at the end of the conversation seemed like it was spliced together twice...@ 6:42 & again @ 6:48 into the clip...

Originally posted by Aggie Man
I'm not saying this is the case, but that bit at the end of the conversation seemed like it was spliced together twice...@ 6:42 & again @ 6:48 into the clip...

3 guys from LA Change plus 2 camera's

different angles , same conversations

Originally posted by Sean48

Originally posted by Aggie Man
I'm not saying this is the case, but that bit at the end of the conversation seemed like it was spliced together twice...@ 6:42 & again @ 6:48 into the clip...

3 guys from LA Change plus 2 camera's

different angles , same conversations

Can we not see 1 camera with just 1 angle throughout the entirety of the conversation? Seems that the angles were only slightly different...so why the need for the angle change? It just smells fishy. anyway to get the original footage, unedited, from this LA Change?

[edit on 10-2-2010 by Aggie Man]

reply to post by Aggie Man


If I was one of those guys , I would show all angles, but I had nothing to do with anything but the linking , and the making of the thread.

I would like a few more angles of the JFK shooting, but we deal with what we have.

Originally posted by Sean48
reply to post by Aggie Man

 

If I was one of those guys , I would show all angles, but I had nothing to do with anything but the linking , and the making of the thread.

I would like a few more angles of the JFK shooting, but we deal with what we have.

I would assume that all cameras were rolling, no? JFK...long time ago...government confiscation/suppression involved....this is recent, the source shouldn't have any problem rolling the footage from 1 single camera through the entire conversation, so as to prove that there was no selective editing going on, no?

I know you didn't have anything to do with it except the linking, you just brought it to our attention. I believe something of this magnitude should have been presented by Change LA in a manner that doesn't raise questions such as the one I presented above...editing is always done for a reason...usually an agenda.

that's one hell of a video. gonna be hard to debunk this one.

reply to post by Coolstorybro


It's already debunked.

Kerrey believes the 9/11 Comission report.

He KNOWS AQ was behind 9/11.

AQ pre-planned 9/11.

Talk about going around with blinders on.

If you go and read this which was written by the man:



You will see him say the exact same thing (ages ago... where were you crack investigators then truthers?) but NONE of it points to anything but the official story, which he believes.

This behaviour is REALLY DESPICABLE.

Here's a quote:

"We decided to achieve a unity of purpose that no commission I have served on has ever done. This enabled us to produce a narrative of the history of a 20-year-old conspiracy—as well as the web of mistakes and negligence—which allowed this attack on the United States to be a success."

Go read it and ACTUALLY open your mind to the truth.

Originally posted by seethelight
reply to post by Coolstorybro

 

It's already debunked.

Kerrey believes the 9/11 Comission report.

He KNOWS AQ was behind 9/11.

AQ pre-planned 9/11.

Talk about going around with blinders on.

If you go and read this which was written by the man:



You will see him say the exact same thing (ages ago... where were you crack investigators then truthers?) but NONE of it points to anything but the official story, which he believes.

This behaviour is REALLY DESPICABLE.

Here's a quote:

"We decided to achieve a unity of purpose that no commission I have served on has ever done. This enabled us to produce a narrative of the history of a 20-year-old conspiracy—as well as the web of mistakes and negligence—which allowed this attack on the United States to be a success."

Go read it and ACTUALLY open your mind to the truth.

Perhaps you need to read what you just quoted again as all it says is 'We did what we could with what we had.' That is hardly a testament to the search for truth.

reply to post by Lillydale


You're kidding, right?

Go read the entire article.

Kerrey beliefs run much more to the SA is responsible/State Sponsors weren't investigated adequately.

Go find a SINGLE quote from him where he even vaguely entertains the "inside job" scenario.

You can't.

Kerrey DOES NOT believe that.

And you guys KNOW THIS.

Stop pretending that "pre-planned" = "inside job".

If AQ did it (which they did) they HAD A PLAN.

[edit on 11-2-2010 by seethelight]

I really need to subscribe to this thread in particular, but with that said, onto my initial reactions to the video.

When watching this video in its entirety, I felt that the amount of footage rolling during the questioning was key to...I'm guessing... continuity of the entire interview so that everything said would be recorded. The raw footage from all 3 would be a great thing to have, but w/o it, they (filmers) did what I seen, minimal edits. But I'm no professional videographer, a friend of mine is, I'll link it to him for his opinion of the vid.

But in reference to kerrys ending responses to the statements regarding 9/11, I believe that the 30year statement was exactly what he said, and meant. And throwing editing out, I believe that firmly, due to his facial expression when correcting the interviewer, but also by looking at the physical reaction of the interviewer himself, to being corrected. He literally reacted as if he had run into a wall...in his case a wall that not only did agree to what he was referencing, but a new revelation(the approximate timetable said), that the designs leading up to the event, was one that was possibly older than the interviewer himself.

And that got me to thinking.....every generation as far as I can think, has had a galvanizing event(and many "smaller" aftershocks) that occured within an approximate 30 year span, that pushed the populace in one direction or another.
For my group(30 somethings), we've seen as elementary kids: the challenger explosion, as teens: WTC bombings & Iraq war#1 and OKC bombings, as young adults: 9/11, outsourcing of jobs and the subsequent war and economic stumblings.

For the generation prior to us(my folks are 50somethings), the 80's(their mid-late 20's) brought: drug epidemic/ AIDS epidemic, in concert with the economic booms and scandals(iran-contra/S&L). the 70's(as teens): fuel crisis and "conclusion" of the vietnam war, though its effects still resonate today. the 60's(as kids): the assassinations of 2 great people that were for common good( JFK-MLK), cuban missle crisis, mans debatable trip to the moon(by some).

And before that, for prior generations there were 2 world wars, many civil wars, in respect to all countries and an establishment of a banking system that ties us all together with little eventual backing by a precious minerals (gold,silver eg.).

Hopefully I haven't gotten too far off the mark with what I'm implying, but if we've had major issues happen in 30 year spans(that do overlap, as kids that witness the events will and mostly do have kids by their 30's) and we, for the most part acknowledge or debate the presence of a secret organization possibly pushing towards a common goal, does it make sense also that the creators of the "plan" aren't so much interested in pushing the total plan out at one time, as the victims of it will outright reject/ or revolt against the plan if thrown out all at once, so to do it incrementaly and with no regards to their own individual mortality, so long as the end result is total?

Is it too far fetched to imagine that such a group works over the course of generations to achieve its goal rather than years?
I ask that, because personally, when I look at myself and my business ownership strategy, I do not so much as care for the immediate gratifications, so much as its possible positive effect on my family line down the road...my childrens, children basically and of maybe those that played major roles in the developement of my business.

And with that, if we look at what we believe kerry implies, what can be done to, first recognize the ones involved, then its plan and finally, if its seen to be non-benificial to the "greater good", eliminate it?

reply to post by seethelight


I never said he endorses the inside job theory. I simply stated the truth that you are trying so hard to ignore. What he said was that he knows he does not know everything. That is what he said, plain and simple. Take it or leave it. Take it for what it is worth. No matter what you do with it, just take it. You are pretending he did not say that so you can pretend he said that he knows it was AQ and blah blah blah. That is not what he says. He says he has lots of ideas and none of them are truther ideas but in the end they are still just ideas because he knows he does not know all he should know.

I guess that comments for the guy above me, cause I believe kerreys said exactly what he meant.

Originally posted by canadiansenior70
I say the greed, the need of power, the Narcissistic Illuminati, The New World Order, The One World Government, the reduction of the world population to ½ billion, the FEMA concentration camps, the stockpile of coffins, the hand-picked puppet Presidents, all ruled by a 'Shadow Government' has me baffled as to how this could happen.

Sounds like you have watched "Zietgiest". Keep in mind that this documentary is a lot fictitious propaganda with a little truth added in. There is just enough raw truth to get us to believe the overall message which is, in the end, bunk, in my opinion. If there is a world organization that is out to control everything with the goal of reducing the population to 500 million then keep in mind that they have always failed. As this theory goes, for centuries they have tried and failed, if this theory is real then they will fail again as they have done before.
The endeavor of striving for power is a futile one as power is an illusion. The goal of chasing illusions has never gained anything substantial.

So can someone in USA tell me how you/we stop this? There are a few of them, and millions of us.

The best way to stop this, which is also the long road, is to see things for what they are (i.e. the truth). This may not sound like much but trust me, when the majority of the population can tell the difference between truth and fallacy this will no longer be a problem and everyone will be better off.

Originally posted by seethelight
Now, some things you truthers should mull over:

Excuse me for picking on your quote here but what in the world is a "truther"?
Something derogatory about people looking for the truth?
If this is the case then what is the opposition to this, those who are making up lies?
I have heard it used in the media and on National Geographic yet this word has no real definable meaning. This appears as though it is something that was made up like one of George W's words, "comencencical" Perhaps we could add these to his library.

reply to post by ahmonrarh


Equally the look on his face could be because he's just realised he's talking to a Truth Movement type. At that point I rather imagine that he knows he's not involved in a useful conversation.

reply to post by TrickoftheShade


Ahh...that too is possible....*shrugs shoulders* working deep nights leaves too much time for pondering on my part...lol!

But the play on his meaning is fun to say the least...and to below poster, I'm going to recheck the vid on my desktop pc, as my blackberry, while having decent sound quality, has a not so good vid screen.

[edit on 11-2-2010 by ahmonrarh]

Originally posted by Sean48
fast forward to about 5:58
and hear it as was recorded.

But the problem is this: it was a continuous take until right before and during the question, and during before the critical answer and right after the "30 year conspiracy" comment - the video was very well edited to make it look like he said that.

Why not edit it until then? Why only then?
I'm not buying this video. Someone is trying to make it look like he said this.

Is there another source without the edits?

Originally posted by alienesque
ive heard a few times that the explosives were built into the buildings from day 1..

Paul Laffoley, who was employed by Emery Roth and Sons, worked as an architect on WTC II. In this interview on the show "Radio Orbit" he states that he was asked by the "Bin Laden construction" group employees where one would put demolition devices into WTC II. He also mentioned that buildings in NY at that time were commonly built with charges into them since they were going up and down so often.

Listen from 07:55 to of this clip from the interview

[edit on 11/2/2010 by nightlark]

reply to post by Devino


ok, yes, its was a conspiracy, as in the terrorist did conspire against America and committed this act. what i mean is that there is no conspiracy from the American government.

i too have watched many films and read many reports about an alleged conspiracy from the US government and at one opint i was certain it was true. Then i looked into the offical reasons, checked with all the reports and found that there is overwhelming proof this is NOT a conspiracy.

you get a post like this one, and barely anyones mentions the fact it is not a conspiracy, everyone claims to believe it is, blindly, without any "real" proof. hardly anyone has acknowledged the fact that i have even stated that it is not a conspiracy, except you and one other person. most people just skip the messages that suggest that the reasons given are infact the correct reasons behind it all. so thanks for at least taking time to reply LoL.

ever hear of Occams razor? the simplest answer is more than often the correct one. yep, easy to believe it is a conspiracy by our government, easier to believe it is not.

just remember that al-Qaede still exsist, still threaten our way of life and still kill our soldiers and innocent civilians every other day