911blogger.com seeks to cover a broad spectrum of news. Blog posts are the responsibility of the poster. Readers are encouraged to check the facts, debate, and form their own conclusions.
"... and Popular Mechanics’ issue on the subject is a good place to start."
-Singer turned pundit, David Rovics/CommonDreams.org
CommonDreams is a highly visited "progressive" news site. The focus there is mainly on reprinting corporate-produced pieces that somehow share the biases of the editors. They do also however print editorials from freelance writers, and when the issue of the 9/11 cover up is breached, only one side is permitted to weigh in. And that side is permitted to outright attack and to libel the other side, the 'other' side being the amorphous "9/11 Truth Movement."
No response in kind is permitted; it doesn't matter the content, nor the quality of the evidence. This policy has rightly earned CommonDreams the reputation of "gatekeepers" among disgruntled readers.
I'll cut to the chase: the cover up of 9/11 was all about hiding incompetence; that is the opinion of Philip Shenon (NY Times) and the gaggle of book reviewers who promote his tome over at Big Media.
Let's make the crucial distinction up front:
It's not "incompetence"
if done intentionally.
This unthinkable concept has never made it up to the editors and reporters of America's well-paid professional journalism class. There can only be unintentional incompetence, and never purposeful malfeasance: never agency of treason.
Such myths would be comforting if there weren't a long and despicable history of such government crimes to draw upon -- something professional journalists are supposed to be aware of, yet never seem to write about.
"After hearing and reviewing the extensive testimony and evidence, which had never before been tested under oath in a court of law, it took the Memphis jury only one (1) hour to find that a conspiracy to kill Dr. King did exist. Most significantly, this conspiracy involved agents of the governments of the City of Memphis, the state of Tennessee and the United States of America. The overwhelming weight of the evidence also indicated that James Earl Ray was not the triggerman and, in fact, was an unknowing patsy... We stand by that verdict and have no doubt that the truth about this terrible event has finally been revealed." -Statement of King Family on the Justice Department's "Limited investigation" of the MLK Assassination, January 15, 2007
by John Doraemi
I might as well get an article out of my serial banning in the "progressive" sphere of the interweb tubes. Funny, I hold some pretty "progressive" ideas.
My ideas about the corruption of the alternative media by foundation funding grants seems to irk a few lib-censors however. That is where the rubber and road meet. They wanna get paid, homes. And they don't want readers to know by whom.
Somebody may find this issue instructive. Alternet.org just banned me, without explanation. I figured it out quickly however, because my last post there was deleted, which I will try and recreate here from an admittedly faulty memory.
Crimes of the State
Sibel risks jail time (or worse) in order to make these highly disturbing allegations against high ranking US government officials. Sibel has been officially gagged by the Justice Department (sic) for several years.
Sibel also testified to the 9/11 Commission, but her allegations were ignored, and her testimony eliminated from their final report. In her open letter to Thomas Kean, the nominal head of the 9/11 Commission, Edmonds first made public her most shocking allegations:
I have confirmed that the DOJ document does reveal what is claimed in this article. Specifically: the FBI informant and "asset" that lived with 2 alleged 9/11 hijackers was paid $100.000 in 2003 for unspecified reasons, even though he refused to meet with Congressional investigators and even with DOJ Inspector General investigators.
Others have described this as the FBI "hiding" him.
Posted by jimd3100
December 18, 2007, 11:43:37 AM
FBI Informant paid $100,000 to help carry out 9/11
As most of us know two hijackers involved in 9/11, Khalid Almidhar and Nawaf Alhazmi, were living with an FBI informant in San Diego.
So who was this informant and what was his role in 9/11? After Dec 2002 the DOJ conducted an OIG report to give us this answer.
9/11 - NY Judge Rules Against 9-11 Widow
Lawyer says court’s decision designed to suppress Ellen Mariani’s quest for truth
By Mark Anderson
NEW YORK—Ellen Mariani is vowing to appeal a federal court order “preventing her from having a direct role in the 9-11 wrongful death action arising from her husband’s murder on United Airlines Flight 175,” her new attorney, Bruce Leichty of California, informed American Free Press.
Flight 175 was flown into the south tower of the World Trade Center, according to the official account of the 9-11-01 terrorist attacks.
This order of Judge Alvin Hellerstein has temporarily derailed Mariani’s attempt to challenge the mysterious settlement of her deceased husband’s claims against United Airlines, said Leichty. But he vowed that his advocacy on behalf of Mariani’s interests has just begun, and said that Hellerstein’s order shows “blatant prejudice” against the 9-11 widow.
Crimes of the State
I hear a lot of nonsense on the Internet -- much disinformation,  plain old vanilla misinformation, and grotesque ignorance up the wazoo.
Ignorance of specific facts and incidents is excusable, but an entirely fraudulent view of modern history?
You can't quite be sure if your fellow travellers have any inkling of their own nation's history, of their own government's substantiated, well-documented, and even admitted-to series of wrongdoings -- crimes, conspiracies.
Thus, you inevitably run into the cult of wild-eyed hyper-emotional flag-wavers who bring along their own lexicon of rude, arrogant and sometimes vulgar slurs. I'm referring to the "conspiradroid," "whack job," "nutcase," "moonbat," variety.
Why do these people seek solace in ignorance? I can understand that the alternative is scary, even terrifying. But hiding your head under the pillow does not make reality just disappear. Sorry, children.
firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, BowmanL@SHNS.com, GayL@SHNS.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, Sprengelmeyerme@shns.com, LowyJ@shns.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, McFeattersD@SHNS.com, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, AmbroseJ@SHNS.com, PowelsonR@shns.com, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, DonatelliJ@shns.com, HedgesM@shns.com
If you're going to be so obviously one-sided, why bother pretending anymore?
Your article, "Many Americans still believe in conspiracies" tells only one side of each of the topics mentioned. This is disgraceful "journalism" that is clearly nothing more than a "hit piece." Rather than examine why these views are so popular, you have insulted those who hold these views, and you have solicited analysis by psychologists in a most condescending and pretentious manner.
I'm disgusted that Ron Paul voted repeatedly against the Cheney impeachment bill (HR333, NOW HR799). This was roll call 1037, 1038, and 1039. Paul sided with Sterney Hoyer who attempted to kill the bill altogether, and against Kucinich.
Congressman Ron Paul, explain yourself?
I had praised Paul for his statements about the lack of independent investigation into 9/11. Paul should certainly have taken the same stance on investigating Dick Cheney in formal impeachment proceedings.
The second vote, which is inexcusable and just hypocritical for Paul and his carefully crafted persona is roll call 993, The "Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007."
Paul did not vote.
Kucinich showed up to vote against it. One of 6 to actually stand up for the Constitution.
Where was Dr. Paul?
I found this today when logging in to 911blogger. "Specificclick" is some kind of spyware/adware site according to a google search.
I don't remember ever seeing this before the server went down yesterday. Can the administrators look into this? Or is it just my computer?
Defending the Indefensible: Noam Chomsky's 9/11 Spin
Noam Chomsky's 2006 "analysis" of US government 9/11 complicity is being promoted by Alternet.org as if it was news. That's because Chomsky basically sides with the editors there and their dismissive attitudes toward looking at the evidence.
In this battle of ideas, it warms my heart that Alternet's boards are swamped with controversy the minute they try to push this garbage onto the unsuspecting.
I remain a bit dazed though that hard core "leftists" accept Chomsky's thin dismissal, and ignore the most important admission Chomsky has made:
"I mean even if it [US GOVERNMENT COMPLICITY IN THE 9/11 ATTACKS] were true, which is extremely unlikely, who cares? I mean it doesn't have any significance." -Noam Chomsky
Crimes of the State Blog
It's not civil disobedience, but corporate disobedience -- upsetting the corporate control paradigm -- that just plain flips out the media oligarchs and their loyal proxies.
"It's not a debate. It's a debate between us. You're in the audience. Audience comes from the Latin, 'to listen'."
--Bill Maher, (confronted by WeAreChange LA regarding his 9/11 censorship
The most powerful weapon the corporate state has is editorial control. The information clampdown is total, on certain topics. No "debate" is allowed, and opposition voices are not permitted to appear despite the validity of their case, or the amount and quality of evidence they can provide. Opposition is routinely written out of history, and it is demonized when it refuses to remain silent.
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it." --Upton Sinclair
I must be crazy, bothering to write to you shameless three, after that display on Carlson's show. Topics provided by Matt Drudge, that's nice to know.
Isn't 9/11 in a slightly different light when you mention what happened to Bush in Genoa Italy, in July 2001?
A little refresher on that one. Let's see, a warning of a "suicide skyjacking" by "Al Qaeda" to hijack a commercial airliner and "crash it into the summit of industrialized nations." This was a warning of an assassination attempt on Bush's life. Italian security forces placed anti-aircraft missiles around Columbus airport in Genoa.
Any of this ring a bell?
No. You guys dont talk about this factual account in your publications. Why exactly is that?
Me@GlennBeck.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, Strategic.Sourcing@turner.com, email@example.com
Subject: Frothing Fascist Glenn Beck Has No Business on CNN "News" Network
Propaganda is not news. Is this some alien idea over at CNN these days? Send Beck over to Fox, where at least we know it's all spin all the time.
"Bill Maher's nasty spat with some 9/11 conspiracy nut jobs was a nuisance on live TV, but are these conspiracy theorists a menace to society? You bet they are."
Beck and censorship are the real "menace to society." The protestors were using civil disobedience (something Beck evidently never heard of) to protest Maher and his network's censorship of the most important news story of our time: the black and white proven cover up of the 9/11 attacks.