Did the USA orchestrate the mammoth Asian tsunami of December 2004? 05.08.2005 With Afghanistan and Iraq already lost, the Wall Street bankers were all desperately looking for other ways to control our world, when suddenly and very conveniently, the Sumatran Trench exploded

Despite having a huge number of tsunami victims in its own State of Tamil Nadu, India completely converted the survey ship INS Nirupak into a 50-bed floating hospital in less than 72 hours, then sent it unarmed to help the desperate people of Aceh in Indonesia. By direct comparison, America sent combat ships and armed Marines. The US Navy has two 1,000 bed hospital ships, the 'Comfort' and the 'Mercy', but neither one was dispatched. Though the USNS Comfort was deployed to New York when 3,000 Americans died in September 2001, this current lack of action sends a strong signal that 150,000 (mostly Muslim) dead in South East Asia, and half a million injured, are of no concern whatever to the power brokers in New York.

The Indian Government knew full well that this was not a "normal" earthquake. On 27 December India refused to join George Bush's planned exclusive 'club of four', which would have effectively pulled this Asian nuclear power out of its new coalition with Russia, China and Brazil. On 28 December the Indian Government politely warned the American military to stay clear of Indian sovereign territory, and on 29 December the India Daily Editorial publicly questioned the nature of the event: "Was this a showdown by a country to show the region what havoc can be created?" ... "Given the level of devastation and given the fact India is a regional power in South Asia, [the] Indian Navy has an obligation to investigate and tell the world what they found."

Theoretically, the American 9 megaton W-53 thermonuclear warhead could easily be encased in a small 'lookalike' saturation diving chamber similar to that on the right, to protect it from the massive 10,000 pounds per square inch pressures at the bottom of the Sumatran Trench. The whole armored package would weigh less than five tons, allowing it to be slipped over the stern of any oil rig supply vessel, of which there are more than 300 in Asia alone. Who would even notice?

Despite a natural human tendency to be shocked into silence by the sheer number of dead and injured across Asia on 26 December 2004, and despite also being slightly fearful of losing personal credibility because of the magnitude of the apparent crime, there are many provable irregularities in the official American tsunami story that simply have to be recorded now, or forever be lost in the sands of time.

It is beyond any doubt that a giant tidal wave (tsunami) smashed its way through South and South East Asia, and still had enough legs to continue all the way across the Indian Ocean to Africa, where it killed and injured a few hundred more. So the only question we must ask, is whether this tsunami was a natural or man-made catastrophe? A natural event would be horrifying enough, but if the tsunami was man-made, then we are unquestionably looking at the biggest single war crime in global history.

At midday local Australian time I faithfully recorded the magnitude and position plotted by the Jakarta Geophysical Office in Indonesia. An earthquake measuring 6.4 on the Richter scale had hit the north of the Indonesian island of Sumatra. The Jakarta Geophysical Office meticulously noted that the epicenter of the event was located 155 miles south-southwest of Aceh Province.

This location is approximately 250 miles south of the position later selected by the American NOAA, which plotted the epicenter to the north-west of Aceh, and initially claimed a Richter reading of 8.0. Alas, even that was not enough to cover the damage caused by this extraordinary event, so NOAA progressively upgraded the reading to 8.5, then to 8.9, and finally to 9.0 - at least for the present.

So, the first proven irregularities were peddled by American officials at the NOAA, who suddenly invented a new 'flexible' peak seismic wave for the event, of far greater magnitude than Jakarta, when the Jakarta office was located much closer at almost point-blank range. Believe me when I tell you there is no such thing as the new 'flexible' peak claimed by NOAA. The first seismic peak you record is the only real peak, unless of course you later manually draw in a few more peaks of your own, to match a contrived agenda. Naturally there is also only one epicenter, which was faithfully recorded by dozens of Indonesian and Indian seismographs.

On the morning of 27 December, the Australian (New York owned) media was making it very clear that the most badly hit nation in the region was Sri Lanka, an island at the southern tip of India, which like Australia is a member nation of the British Commonwealth. Accordingly, Tim Costello, head of one of Australia's largest charities, made immediate plans to fly to the area and assess the need for aid. But that same morning, Little Johnny was dancing to a very different tune, which, based on his known subservience, must have been playing down his secure telephone line from Wall Street.

In true covert manner, Little Johnny secretly dispatched two RAAF Hercules transport planes packed with supplies to Malaysia on "Stand By", and directed two more to Darwin in Australia's north. Please note that if Little Johnny had any humanitarian concerns at all, all four Hercules could have flown directly to Commonwealth partner Sri Lanka, where every other Australian had already been told by the media that aid was needed. But no, it wasn't to be, and Little Johnny waited patiently for orders from New York.

The waiting period was short, and after a high-flying reconnaissance jet confirmed that the runway was clear at Medan in eastern Sumatra, all four Australian Hercules complete with troops, guns and other tackle, invaded Sumatra just south of the devastated province of Aceh. In turn, with 90% of its population killed by the tsunami, Aceh might perhaps one day soon become Indonesia's very own Guantanamo Bay, crawling with hundreds of heavily armed Australians and Americans.

Remember carefully though, at the time these four Hercules touched down in Medan, the ordinary Australian public still had no idea that Sumatra was badly hit. Only Little Johnny knew, and of course his trusty crystal ball in New York. To hell with Sri Lanka, his bosses wanted a main base for the huge reconstruction contracts in Asia, designed to replace the failed oil theft and reconstruction in Iraq, and keep poor old Zion on its tottering New York legs for a few more weeks or months.

Needless to say the Australians were merely the advance party, soon to be joined by a curiously well prepared and equipped U.S. Military, though it is doubtful that any of the officers and men involved really comprehend what is going on. Only a handful thought to question why they had been spending a whole year training for a "Humanitarian Mission", when the whole point of the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps is normally to kill people in very large numbers. Just look at Fallujah, people, look at Fallujah.

As if by magic, the Pentagon managed to have two battle groups ready to sail at an instant's notice from Hong Kong and Guam during the normally chaotic Christmas to New Year period. Crikey! Military discipline has come a hell of a long way since my day, when everyone including the ship's cat was sleeping it off at some highly questionably hostelry or another. Not these 10,000+ Americans though, who must have been standing rigidly to attention beside their hammocks day and night, tugging furiously at their forelocks whenever an officer of NCO came in sight.

The next bit was superbly orchestrated, because it took place at sea, far away from the prying eyes of dock spies or imaginary KGB agents. But oops, first you have to know who was involved. Out of Hong Kong rushed team one, comprised of the nuclear-powered USS Abraham Lincoln and her escort vessels, while the far more interesting team two rushed out of Guam, led by the USS Bonhomme Richard, a marine amphibious assault carrier crammed to the gunwales with gun-toting wooden tops. And that is not all, believe me, because the Bonhomme Richard is in fact leading a veritable armada known as "Expeditionary Strike Group 5".

The really sneaky (inexplicable) bit came as both battle groups entered the Indian Ocean. The USS Abraham Lincoln looked about as innocent as a carrier with 70 attack planes can look, but was already carrying 2,000 marines instead of her normal complement of around 500. That is a huge amount of grunt firepower to put on the deserted streets of Banda Aceh, especially when Wall Street normally expects these marines to die quietly for Zion in Iraq. Now then, how did they know the extra marines would be needed before team one left Hong Kong, because the surplus 1,500 marines were certainly not just standing around on Kowloon dock waiting to hitch a ride.

Then while the two battle groups (apparently) headed in two different directions across the deserted Indian Ocean, an even stranger event took place. Though Expeditionary Strike Group 5 (Humanitarian) was supposed to help the folks in Sri Lanka, the combat marines aboard the USS Bonhomme Richard transferred to amphibious transport dock vessel USS Duluth, which then split from ESG-5 and headed towards team one. So without the Indonesians really being aware of it, the (relatively) harmless and Bulky aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln has been used to screen the arrival of at least 3,500 heavily-armed US Marines in tiny Aceh Province.

That more or less brings us up to date on known military activity, though yesterday an Australian television cameraman did accidentally film some of these heavily-armed US Marines (who tried to shoo him away), searching a devastated Indonesian military base for any remaining weapons. Now call me old-fashioned, but if these guys and their bosses are straight, that particular job should be left to the Indonesian Army?

I will be circumspect as to exactly how a large American thermonuclear weapon managed to arrive at the bottom of the Sumatran Trench, though all of the seismic evidence and preparedness for the resulting mission indicates strongly that this is the case. After all, we are back to the age-old question of "who benefits?", and in this particular case, "Who is insane enough to kill more than 150,000 civilians just to hang on to power?' Based on their past performance in Iraq and other luckless countries, it would seem that the only realistic candidates are Wolfowitz and company, striving as always to create a "One World Government".

Certainly no other nuclear powers including Russia and China stand to gain anything at all from such an outrageous mass murder, so, as always in the end, we come back to Sherlock Holmes via the pen of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle: "When you have ruled out the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, is the truth."

For the Zionist Cabal, obtaining a thermonuclear weapon in America is no great trick, especially when we have the precedent of 100 small 'decommissioned' air-to-air atomic warheads being smuggled out the Pentagon's (civilian) back door, to form the core of the Jewish State's current nuclear arsenal. Once a weapon system is out date and out of service, loyal uniformed US military personnel can no longer track it.

The designer of the RAF's bouncing bomb (actually called "Highball") was a scientist called Barnes Wallace, who had already gained a formidable reputation with his Wellington bomber, which he constructed geodetically, thus enabling it to absorb enormous punishment before actually being shot out of the sky. Many Wellington returned to base literally in tatters, while many luckless cousins like the Stirling and Halifax were all too often consigned to the murky deep of the North Sea.

Wallace knew that bombing the dams vertically was a complete waste of time, and the only possibility of success lay in placing a mine hard up against the dam wall at its base. You see, water cannot be compressed, meaning that if the mine was pressed against the dam wall at the moment of detonation, part of its energy would automatically be expended on the wall itself. Too far away in the relatively shallow water, and most of the blast energy would be lost to atmosphere, in a huge exploding cloud of water of course.

Though it was obvious that the dam wall could not be destroyed by a single bomb from a single Lancaster bomber (it would weight far too much for the aircraft to get off the ground), Wallace pinned his hopes on the scientific fact that cumulative stress should do the job, and he was proved right. Though officially three of the bombs, each containing 6,500 pounds of TNT, were considered to be direct hits, one of these veered off slightly, meaning that the giant Mohne Dam was completely breached by a total of 13,000 pounds of tri-nitro toluene.

It is the incompressibility of water in particular that matters deep down in the Sumatran Trench. At the bottom you already have 10,000 pounds of pressure per square inch pressing down on your weapon of choice, and above that weapon there is a column of water 20,000 feet tall, which is what caused the pressure in the first place. Not only that. The trench narrows at the bottom, meaning that the weapon is 'hemmed-in', with a very real chance of moving a tectonic plate if sufficient tonnage is used.

In this particular case there was no real need to shift a tectonic plate, and science suggests that if this blast had caused such an effect, several very powerful aftershocks would have occurred, as has happened with every other major earthquake in the past. But, as previously stated, and setting aside the seemingly deliberate provocative though false warnings from the American NOAA, there has not been a single aftershock which can be directly & scientifically linked to the 'event' in the Sumatran Trench at 0758 hours local on 26 December 2004. Later tremors might or might not be connected to the weapon.

To force subservience on Asia, and ensure the lion's share of incredibly lucrative reconstruction contracts, all that was needed was a very large tsunami targeted on the selected nations, which was easily within the capabilities of a large thermonuke. There is nothing new about "Sea Bursts" as they are called, and more than 30 years ago plans existed in both America and Russia to wipe out each other's coastal cities using exactly this technique. The tidal wave from a deep sea burst is relatively clean, allowing the aggressor to take over both land and remaining buildings etc. with the minimum of delay.

If everything had gone to plan, then Indonesia, Sri Lanka and India would have been in hock to the IMF and World Bank for thirty or more years - time enough to wait for the price of oil to come down again after the lethal fiasco in Iraq. At the same time, if the Indian Government had taken the bait, the deadly Russian-Chinese-Indian-Brazilian coalition would have been dead in the water. Not a bad day's work for a single thermonuclear weapon discreetly removed from the decommissioning process.

Joe Vialls

Forside Artikler Downloads Links Nyhedskategorier Kontakt siden Søg Foreslå link Foreslå artikel

Besøgende Gæster online: 1 Ingen brugere online

Antal brugere: 59 Ikke aktiverede brugere: 0 Nyeste bruger: Rol

Nyeste artikler MATRIX 911 911 SKILT UA 175 NYT FOTO GROUND ZERO BRAND BIN LADEN QUIZ

Cadimage Pack 10 For Archicad 10, Scalix Xandros Edition 1.0 Linux, SITNI SATI AFTERBURN 3.2 FOR 3DSMAX 7 cheap buy, Borland C Sharp Builder Enterprise 1.0, sale low price Arturia Storm 3.0, ZoneLabs ZoneAlarm with AntiSpyware 6.1.514.000, Finale 2004, download oem CSC Fastrak 12.0, ComponentOne Studio for ActiveX 2005.3, ACD Systems Canvas X.0.2.925 Mac OS X cheap buy, Video Charge 3.7.0.04, Lokas Software Artistic Effects v1.5 for Photoshop download oem, Norton Internet Security Pro 2004, Adobe Acrobat Plugins Collection volume 2 cheap buy, DevExpress ExpressBars Suite v5.1 For Delphi 7, cheap buy AddWeb Web Page Promoter Pro 7.2.8.5, AUTO FX SOFTWARE MYSTICAL TINT TONE AND COLOR TRAINING VIDEOS, RealImation 5.2, cheap buy Roxio Easy Media Creator 8 Multilanguage download oem, Mobipocket Creator Home Edition 4.0, Native Instruments Kontakt 2.0.0.002, sale low price Traktor DJ Studio 2.6.1.022, ETA CAD Translator 1.200601, Delcam Copycad 6.0 cheap buy, Sax Basic Engine Enterprise 6.4.50, MSC Patran 2005 R2, cheap buy AlgoLab Raster to Vector Conversion Toolkit v2.63 cheap buy, Lynda.com Flash Professional 8 Video Integration, sale low price ArchVision RealPeopleCollection 2 cheap buy, Infragistics NetAdvantage 2005 Vol 1 WinForms, download oem Realize Voice 4.1.730 Parse error: syntax error, unexpected $end in /customers/11september.dk/11september.dk/httpd.www/side_left.php(25) : eval()'d code on line 2

FEMTEN UBEHAGELIGE SPØRGSMÅL OM 11. SEPTEMBER

Nyheder

Images: Northtower_precollapse.jpg

Hvor mærkelig denne teori end lyder, har den gode argumenter. Den amerikanske professor emeritus D.R. Griffin (teoriens hovedfortaler) og mange andre forfattere såsom ingeniøren Eric Hufschmid, samt en mængde hjemmesideskribenter påpeger en lang række fakta som modsiger den officielle forklaring. Det drejer sig egentlig om alle begivenheder på terrordagen, lige fra flykaprernes identitet og manglende evner som piloter til telefon­opkaldene fra flyene, kollisionen med Pentagon mm. Jeg vil dog her begrænse mig til tvillinge­tårnenes kollaps. Man kan sammenfatte de væsentligste argumenter i form af følgende femten spørgsmål:

1) Hvordan kunne tvillinge­tårnene overhovedet styrte sammen, når videoer og fotos viste at brandene var uhyre begrænsede? F. eks. viser det vedlagte nærbillede af Nordtårnet (taget 30 sekunder før dets kollaps) kun flammer på begrænsede dele af nogle få etager. Derudover ses kraftig sort røg. Kan denne meget begrænsede brand forklare, at hele bygningen på 110 etager blev totalt tilintetgjort fra det ene øjeblik til det andet?

2) Hvordan kunne brandene i tårnene nå en temperatur der kunne forklare stålbjælkernes brist? Intet højhus med stålramme er før kollapset på grund af brand.

3) Hvordan kunne tårnene styrte så hurtigt sammen? Sydtårnet kollapsede på omkring 10 sekunder, Nordtårnet på lidt over 8 sekunder. For to bygninger af 400 meters højde svarer disse tidsrum omtrent til hastigheden for det frie fald. Det betyder, at de bærende konstruk­tioner overhovedet ingen modstand har ydet under kollapset! Hvorfor har denne stærke stålkonstruktion i 110 etager, som var bygget til at modstå kollisionen fra en jumbojet, ikke kunnet forsinke kollapset i mindste grad? Det skulle vel aldrig være fordi bjælkernes sammen­føjninger blev sprængt i luften – hvilket man netop gør under kontrolleret nedrivning?

4) Bygningsdele blev slynget vandret ud i luften under tårnenes kollaps. Det vedlagte foto viser stålbjælker i luften mere end 70 meter fra Nordtårnet. Andre bjælker fra Nordtårnet landede knap 600 fod borte. Hvorfor faldt disse stålbjælker ikke bare nedad? Kunne andet end eksplosioner have skubbet dem ud med så enorm kraft?

Images: steelbeams_midair.jpg

5) Hvordan kunne Nordtårnet under sit kollaps i det væsentligste holde sig indenfor sit eget grundplan, dvs. uden at spredes? Det er netop et kendemærke ved kontrolleret nedrivning, at bygningen ikke falder til nogen af siderne.

6) Sydtårnets kollaps begyndte på den måde at en vandret revne opstod omkring 76. etage, hvorved de øverste ca. 34 etager skiltes fra de underliggende og begyndte at tippe ud over bygningen. Man skulle forvente, at dette sammenhængende afsnit af 34 etager ville falde uden for bygningens grundplan, men det ramte aldrig jorden. Hvad fik det til at pulveriseres under sit fald?

7) Ved tårnenes kollaps dannedes ufattelige mængder af støv fra gips og beton. Fotos viser store dele af Manhattan indhyllet i en støvsky (se foto). I gaderne vandrede folk gennem bunker af op til 30 cm støv. Alt i tårnene på nær stålbjælkerne blev pulveriseret. Aluminiums­bedækningen af skyskrabernes udvendige søjler var revet i småstykker under kollapset og kastet så langt bort som 700 fod fra tårnene. Det så ud som om det havde været gennem en skrælle­maskine, og betonen så ud som om det havde været gennem en pulverisator. Støvpartiklernes gennemsnits­størrelse blev målt til så småt som 10-60 mikron (1 mikron = 1/1000 mm). En kranfører, Bobby Gray, som ryddede op på Ground Zero (ruinerne af WTC) fortæller: »Jeg mindes ikke at have set hverken træværk eller møbler [i ruinerne]. Man skulle tro, at et kontorskab af metal ville kunne overleve faldet, men jeg mindes ikke at have set nogen, heller ingen telefoner, computere eller den slags. Selv i områder hvor der ikke havde været brand fandt vi noget [andet end støv og bjælker]. Det var bare så svært at forstå at alt var blevet pulveriseret i den grad. Hvordan kan et gulvtæppe og et kontorskab blive pulveriseret?« Kan det virkelig passe at den blotte sammen­styrtning (pga. brand) skulle have skabt tilstrækkelig energi til denne totale pulverisering af bygningens betonlag? Passer teorien om sprængstoffer ikke langt bedre?

8) Oprydningsholdene rapporterede om fund af varme pletter af smeltet stål dybt nede i bunkerne af støv og skrot. De fandt, da de efterhånden nåede ned i nogle etagers dybde, ”søer af stål så varme at de stadig var flydende” endnu i den femte uge efter kollapset! Det varme metal havde ligget omgivet af betonstøv, som havde isoleret så godt, at varmen havde kunnet holde sig i ugevis. Der er her tale om temperaturer omkring ståls smeltepunkt 1500 grader Celsius. En normal brand vil næppe blive meget varmere end 1000 grader. Spræng­stoffer derimod udvikler langt kraftigere varme, hvilket skyldes den store mængde kemisk energi der er bundet i stoffet. Temperaturen på overfladen af skrotbunkerne på Ground Zero blev stedvist målt så højt som 747 grader Celsius – efter man havde sprøjtet vand på bunkerne i fem dage! Hvorfra kom denne ekstreme varme­mængde hvis ikke fra sprængstoffer?

Images: northtower_collapse.jpg

9) En analyse af stålbjælkerne ville have kunnet afsløre brug af sprængstoffer. Men hvorfor blev alt stål da fjernet fra Ground Zero så hurtigt som muligt uden analyse? Hvorfor skulle det fragtes bort til så fjerne lande som Kina og Korea? Hvorfor blev der næsten ingen penge bevilget til undersøgelse af stålbjælkerne inden de blev fjernet? Hvorfor måtte disse vigtige analyser foretages af frivillige medarbejdere som ulønnet arbejde og hvorfor blev selv dette arbejde vanskeliggjort af myndighederne? Hvorfor udstedte man forbud mod fotografering på Ground Zero?

10) En lang række øjenvidner beretter, at de hørte, så og følte eksplosioner i bygningerne kort før kollapset (de hørte serier af brag, så lynglimt, mærkede jorden skælve, blev væltet omkuld af lufttryk o.l.). Alene for sydtårnets vedkommende findes vidnesbyrd om eksplosioner fra 47 nødhjælps­arbejdere (primært brandmænd). Hvorfor blev størstedelen af disse vidneudsagn stemplet fortroligt og hemmeligholdt af myndighederne? Avisen New York Times lagde sammen med nogle af de pårørende til de omkomne sag an mod myndighederne i New York og gennemtvang en frigivelse af dokumenterne, hvilket først lykkedes i 2005. Hvorfor var et sagsanlæg nødvendigt for at få disse vigtige oplysninger frigivet?

11) Vidner blandt WTC-personale fortæller om usædvanlige foranstaltninger i bygningerne i dagene før 11. september. Sikkerheds­enhederne arbejdede, på grund af trussel om angreb, tolv timer om dagen i skiftehold i de to sidste uger før terror­angrebet. En ansat i WTC beretter: ”I weekenden den 8.-9. september 2001 var der en situation i WTCs tårn 2, det sydlige tårn, med strømsvigt. Dette strømsvigt betød, at der ikke var strømtilslutning i omkring 36 timer fra den 50. etage og opefter. Den grund WTC gav for strømsvigtet var, at kabelnettet i tårnet skulle opgraderes. Jeg skulle selv arbejde over denne weekend i bygningen for at sikre at vores computeranlæg blev lukket ordentligt ned og startet op igen bagefter. Selvfølgelig var der uden strøm ingen sikkerhedskameraer, ingen sikkerhedslåse på dørene, mens mange, mange ”teknikere” bevægede sig ind og ud af tårnet.” Kunne de nævnte »sikkerheds­foranstaltninger« dække over et arrangement af en kontrolleret nedrivning, dvs. placering af sprængstof?

12) World Trade Center skiftede ejer kort før terrorangrebet. Et privat ejendoms­­firma ved navn Silverstein Properties tegnede i sommeren 2001 kontrakt med havne­myndighederne i New York og New Jersey om leje af hele komplekset for en periode af 99 år. Firmaet forsikrede bygningerne på en sådan måde, at det ville få en enorm erstatning udbetalt, såfremt en hændelse betegnet som »en terrorhandling« skulle finde sted. Faktisk opnåede Silverstein Properties en forsikringssum på i alt 5 milliarder dollars. Er dette ikke temmelig mistænkeligt?

13) Hvorfor modsatte præsident Bush sig en uvildig undersøgelse af begivenhederne d. 11. september, og hvorfor bortcensurerede han tyve sider af dens rapport? Da regeringen senere efter pres måtte give tilladelse (!) til en mere dybtgående undersøgelse (The Commission Report), hvorfor forbeholdt Bush sig da ret til at udpege medlemmerne af dens kommission?

14) Mente den amerikanske regering det alvorligt, når den hævdede at Osama bin Laden stod bag terrorangrebet? Gjorde hæren egentlig forsøg på at pågribe ham »død eller levende« i Afghanistan? Eller forelå der i virkeligheden en overenskomst af en eller anden art med ham? Allerede i sommeren 2001 var Osama bin Laden efter sigende den mest eftersøgte forbryder i verden - og dog kunne aviser som Le Figaro, Guardian og London Times i november 2001 berette, at han i juli 2001 tilbragte to uger på et amerikansk militærhospital i Dubai (De Forenede Arabiske Emirater), hvor han blev behandlet af en amerikansk kirurg og endda fik besøg af en lokal CIA-agent. Er det sandt, som pressen hævdede, at den amerikanske og britiske hær i november 2001 lod Osama og hans Al Qaeda­-soldater undslippe fra Afghanistan til Pakistan uden virkelige forsøg på at pågribe ham? I marts 2002 blev den manglende interesse for at fange bin Laden bekræftet at Bush selv: »Han er en person der nu er blevet marginaliseret… Jeg gider ikke bruge ret meget tid på ham… Jeg er helt ærligt ikke så bekymret om ham.« Hvordan stemmer dette overens med præsidentens taler i fjernsynet knap et halvt år forinden?

15) Det Hvide Hus har i maj 2007 gennemført en ny lov om at præsidenten overtager kontrollen med alle aktiviteter i fremtidige »katastrofale nødsituationer«. Ifølge dagbladet Politiken gør denne lov reelt set George Bush til diktator, hvis et nyt terrorangreb skulle indtræffe. Hvad er den dybere hensigt med denne beslutning?

Skrevet af : Peter Krabbe