(For a historical archive of our old site visit http://911blogger.com/archive)
An Update from the Truth Gathering, Aug 14-16, Catskill Mountains,
Hi Folks! I wanted to enjoy this visionary statement from Maryland lawyer and Anthrax-Truth investigator, Barry Kissin.
He inspired me to add an entire extra day (Monday, Aug 16) to the Truth Gathering, so that we make the time to strategize about solutions, political moves, and strategy, as a movement, and as the "Truth Party."
On a lighter note, I have been dualistically emphasizing the serious AND the fun about the Truth Gathering.
And on the topic of fun, I have brewed a very special "Truth Party Foundation American Pale Ale" with caramel malts, ginger, Pilsen Light malt extract, chinook and amarillo hops. We will debut this ale at the Saturday 1 PM (Aug 14) BBQ that kicks off the Truth Gathering. [and IF you don't drink, I respect you, I will make you feel included by brewing you a special iced tea!]
We have SOME housing available, see the website: http://www.sanderhicks.com/TGhousingspecial.html
AUGUST 3, 2010
Bid to Revive 9/11 Care Bill
Lawmakers Try to Resolve Standoff
By DEVLIN BARNETT
WASHINGTON—New York lawmakers have begun discussing ways of rescuing a bill to provide health care for ill Ground Zero workers following its defeat on the House floor last week after a bitter battle.
The bill was voted down late Thursday night amid angry partisan finger-pointing, and now Democratic Rep. Carolyn Maloney and others have begun weighing options to make the bill more tolerable to factions on the right and left.
The bill sparked a nasty public fight between two New York lawmakers—Rep. Peter King, a Long Island Republican, and Rep. Anthony Weiner, a Queens Democrat—over the use of a parliamentary procedure to vote on the bill without amendments, requiring a two-thirds vote rather than a simple majority.
As the bill headed for defeat, Messrs. King and Weiner engaged in a furious shouting match on the House floor—not uncommon among lawmakers, but rarely seen between two from the same state who voted together on the bill in question.
Daniel Ellsberg's WikiLeaks wish list
4. The 28 or more pages on the foreknowledge or involvement of foreign governments (particularly Saudi Arabia) that were redacted from the congressional investigation of 9/11, over the protest of then-Sen. Bob Graham (D-Fla.).
Sunday, August 1, 2010
The disclosure of tens of thousands of classified reports on the Afghan war last week by WikiLeaks has been compared, rightly or wrongly, to the release in 1971 of the Pentagon Papers, a top-secret history of U.S. involvement in Vietnam from 1945 to 1967. "The parallels are very strong," Pentagon Papers contributor and leaker Daniel Ellsberg told The Washington Post on Monday. "This is the largest unauthorized disclosure since the Pentagon Papers."
But perhaps not large enough? Outlook asked Ellsberg for his wish list of documents to be leaked, declassified or otherwise made public, documents that could fundamentally alter public understanding of key national security issues and foreign policy debates. Below, he outlines his selections and calls for congressional investigations:
BY Lore Croghan
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Sunday, August 1st 2010
Sick 9/11 responders protested lawmakers who failed to pass the Zadroga health care bill.
Sickened 9/11 responders vented their fury Sunday against lawmakers who failed to pass the Zadroga health care bill - and vowed to stage a massive protest rally in Washington when Congress returns from a six-week vacation.
The Transparent Conspiracy is a collection of essays written between 2006 and 2010, mainly about the 911 and JFK conspiracies and cover up, with a short collection of poems on the same topic. Morrisey’s latest book is a definite departure from other conspiracy literature. Morrissey has no interest in proving or disproving either the 911 or the JFK conspiracy – he feels this territory is well-covered by other authors. The topic of this book is mass psychology. Morrissey believes our government’s propaganda arm (whatever they call it now) is fully aware that a well-managed conspiracy cover-up can have a very intimidating effect, which can be very effective in keeping the public docile and obedient.
Specifically he argues there is major value (from the government point of view) in disclosing a limited amount of information concerning government culpability in atrocities such as the JFK assassination and 911. He bases his view on something he calls “Transparency Theory” – thus his title The Transparent Conspiracy. He says the CIA has long recognized that “telling part of the truth is the best way to lie.” They even have a term for it: “white propaganda.” Morrissey argues that for the government to brazenly commit criminal acts can be quite effective in demoralizing and alienating the tuned-in segment of the population that fully comprehends the corrupt nature of our government institutions. He then lays out the hypothetical question: if the reality of the 911 conspiracy were widely accepted by the American public, would they be capable of doing anything about it? Morrissey believes that at this point in history they would be powerless (that they lack the power to bring the culprits to trial or even impeach them). Which he contends is a powerful basis for demoralization and alienation.
UPDATE 8/15/10: Added a segment about closing statements.
Originally posted: http://arcterus911.blogspot.com/2010/08/cit-is-useless.html
Some time ago I wrote an article about the importance of not wasting time on CIT. Most of their followers are impossible to convince and consequently the endless debates with them are entirely fruitless, resulting in nothing more than distraction. But that's not to say we should ignore them completely. Just because we ignore them doesn't mean they won't be zipping around spouting their flawed testimony, their aggressive behavior, anything that discredits those of us who are careful and have realistic standards of evidence.
There's an issue I just don't see talked about often enough in regards to CIT. People are ready to talk about the things I mentioned above and more. The contradicting testimony, the over-zealous nature of their followers, the fact that the testimony contradicts physical evidence, all these things that relate to debunking them. What I don't see talked about is how this all plays into the legal implications of what CIT is proposing.
John Judge is a researcher and lecturer on many topics from covert operations to political assassinations such as JFK and Martin Luther King.
He has co-founded many commitees including the Committee for an Open Archives, Committee for High School Options and Information on Careers, Education and Self-Improvement (CHOICES) as well as 911CitizensWatch.org in which he played a pivotal role along with 9/11 victims family members in demanding a transparent investigation into the attacks of September 11 2001 by the 9/11 Commission.
John has a website http://www.judgeforyourself.us/ and continues to work on 9/11 research projects in an effort to bring justice to the victims who died in the atrocities that took place on September 11 2001.
I had a chance to talk with John the other night about his research and experience with the 9/11 Commission Report as well as other various issues of importance.
Conversation with John Judge July 26 2010 (Mp3 download link)
"I'm constantly annoyed that people are distracted by false conspiracies such as 9/11, when all around we provide evidence of real conspiracies, for war or mass financial fraud." Julian Asange, Wikileaks, July 19 (Image right)
John Young was one of the co-founders of Wikileaks. He quickly left the organization in disagreement with some of its policies (CNET). Young was a natural choice for Wikileaks since he has operated a leak website, CRYPTOME, since 1996. His site just released two articles on July 31 attributed to Wikileaks' Julian Assange (firstname.lastname@example.org). The announcement read: