MSNBC Works with Alex Jones to Discredit Tea Party Movement

This September 11 we will begin the year leading up to the tenth anniversary of 9/11. 

While much has been accomplished, with so much great work by so many in compiling evidence that the official story was a lie, we still have not broken through to the mainstream press or even most of the alternative press about our evidence and facts.

I am proposing a plan for the entire year leading up to and ending with the tenth anniversary of 9/11 that will hopefully bring attention to the truths as we know them.

I think a big demonstration on 9/11/09 at ground zero would be a great start.  Then each week a different state will have activities and programs, maybe in their capitol city or major city, and with fifty states, that would take us right up to the tenth anniversary, in which a massive rally and demonstration could take place at ground zero.

What do you think? 

I came across this interesting article in today's New York Post entitled "Why experts are usually wrong" by David H. Freedman. I'm passing it on because I think it has particular applicability to the discu"expert" opinion on what brought down the World Trade Center towers. I hope some will enoy it, and even get a chuckle out of it, true as it is.

 "Every day, expert advice assaults us from newspapers, websites and televisions. But judging by the state of the world and our lives, it doesn’t seem to be doing us much good.

"Blame the media (of course), but know that’s only a small part of the problem. Experts — that is, actual scientists, not just Dr. Phil — are often wrong, more often than we might think.

"Scientists themselves have examined the reliability of their own findings, and have come to some sobering conclusions. Take medical research, which has been especially well-scrutinized. About two-thirds of the findings published in top medical journals end up being refuted within a few years. "

Pakistan's ISI intelligence agency provides funding, training and sanctuary to the Taliban in Afghanistan, according to a study which claimed to have the strongest evidence yet of their links.

However the report for the London School of Economics (LSE) was on Sunday dismissed by the Pakistani military as "malicious and baseless".

The LSE study, based on interviews with nine Taliban field commanders in Afghanistan between February and May this year, claims their relationship goes far beyond what is currently known.

"Although the Taliban has a strong endogenous impetus, according to Taliban commanders the ISI orchestrates, sustains and strongly influences the movement," wrote author Matt Waldman, a fellow at Harvard University.

"They say it gives sanctuary to both Taliban and Haqqani groups, and provides huge support in terms of training, funding, munitions, and supplies. In their words, this is 'as clear as the sun in the sky'."