Project Censored specializes in covering the top stories which were subjected to media censorship either by being ignored or downplayed by the mainstream media each year. Project Censored is a research team composed of more than 200 university faculty, students, and community experts who annually review between 700 and 1,000 news story submissions for coverage, content, reliability of sources, and national significance.
The top 25 stories selected are submitted to a distinguished panel of judges who then rank them in order of importance. The results are published each year in an excellent book available for purchase at their website, amazon.com, and most major book stores.
A summary of the top 25 media censorship stories of 2012 provided below proves quite revealing and most informative. Each summary has a link for those who want to read the entire article. For whatever reason the mainstream media won't adequately report on these key stories.
"Experts Speak Out" will air three times this week in Greenville, NC, on the public cable channel, channel 23. Show times are 11 pm tonight (Mon., Jan 7th, 2013), 9 pm Thursday (Jan.,10th), and 2 am Friday (Jan., 11th). It is only available to cable subscribers (Suddenlink Cable) and probably only subscribers in Pitt County (Greenville is county seat).
VIDEO: Project Censored’s Top 25 Unreported Stories of 2012
By Christian Stork on Dec 30, 2012
Project Censored, a non-profit media watchdog organization based at Sonoma State University in California, has recently bestowed a fine holiday gift on news consumers of all stripes. The organization’s yearly review, Censored 2013, highlights the top 25 un-or-underreported stories of 2012.
You can watch video, below of Al Jazeera’s Inside Story: Americas from December 27, in which Project Censored’s director Mickey Huff was interviewed about the list along with Greg Mitchell of The Nation.
Violence and Threats Being Used to Intimidate and Coerce the American Public for Political Purposes
We’ve documented that – by any measure – America is the largest sponsor of terrorism in the world.
But remember, terrorism is defined as:
The use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
The American government has also been using violence and threats to intimidate and coerce the American public for political purposes.
For example, the U.S. government is doing the following things to terrorize the American public into docility and compliance:
U.S. constitutional law has taught for hundreds of years that chilling the exercise of our liberties is as dangerous to freedom than directly suppressing them.
Preface: As a patriotic American – I was born here, lived here all of my life, and love this country – I want the best for the U.S.
Lawless actions are tearing my country apart. I want my country to regain its vision, strength and moral compass. Thomas Jefferson said that “Dissent is the highest form of patriotism”. I criticize my country because I know we are better than this … and that if enough people know how far we have fallen, we can start to pull ourselves back and reclaim our greatness.
Many Countries Sponsor Terror … But America Is the Worst
The director of the National Security Agency under Ronald Reagan – Lt. General William Odom said:
By any measure the US has long used terrorism. In ‘78-79 the Senate was trying to pass a law against international terrorism – in every version they produced, the lawyers said the US would be in violation.
The Washington Post reported in 2010:
The United States has long been an exporter of terrorism, according to a secret CIA analysis released Wednesday by the Web site WikiLeaks.
The head and special agent in charge of the FBI’s Los Angeles office said that most terror attacks are committed by our CIA and FBI.
FBI classified information about OWS assassination plot
Published: 02 January, 2013, 21:29
Edited: 03 January, 2013, 20:30
Only one month into the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations last year, plans were formulated to identify key figures in the movement and execute them with a coordinated assault using sniper rifles, new documents reveal.
The revelation — discussed in a heavily redacted FBI memo unearthed late last month through a Freedom of Information Act request — reveals that the Federal Bureau of Investigation was aware of plans for a violent assault on the peaceful protest movement but stayed silent on rumors of an assassination attempt only until now.
Information on the alleged plot to kill off protesters appears on page 61 of the trove of documents obtained recently by a FOIA request filed by the Partnership For Civil Justice Fund. On the page in question, marked “SECRET,” the FBI acknowledges:
A new letter at the Journal of 9/11 Studies: Our Truth is a Command Toward Freedom Don Paul, December, 2012
At the Journal of 9/11 Studies we've published a new letter from author-activist Don Paul. The letter is titled -- Our Truth is a Command Toward Freedom: Connecting " '9/11' " to The " 'War on Terror,' " 1.4 Billion Rounds and 30,000 Drones.
A winner of Stanford University's Stegner Fellowship in creative writing, Don Paul is known for his groundbreaking books " '9/11' ": Facing Our Fascist State and Waking Up From Our Nightmare (with Jim Hoffman). Paul's use of double quotes around 9/11 and The War on Terror reflects the corporate government/media's intention to create an echo-effect or resonance of such terms in our public consciousness.
Here's an excerpt from the letter:
"We need to keep telling our truths. We need to keep pointing out holes in Official Stories. We need to keep confronting monsters. We need to keep seeing straight and raising our voices.
One reality we can continue to tell is that " '9/11'' " and the " 'War on Terror' " are both absurd but murderous pretexts. They're rotten root and rotten branch.
The " '9/11' " rotten root and the " 'War on Terror' " rotten branch run through both Republican and Democrat Administrations."
Happy New Year, Kevin
The Coming Drone Attack on America
By Naomi Wolf, Guardian UK
22 December 12
Drones on domestic surveillance duties are already deployed by police and corporations. In time, they will likely be weaponised
People often ask me, in terms of my argument about "ten steps" that mark the descent to a police state or closed society, at what stage we are. I am sorry to say that with the importation of what will be tens of thousands of drones, by both US military and by commercial interests, into US airspace, with a specific mandate to engage in surveillance and with the capacity for weaponization - which is due to begin in earnest at the start of the new year - it means that the police state is now officially here.
Oliver Stone: 'US Has Become An Orwellian State'
Video By RT
Americans are living in an Orwellian state argue Academy Award-winning director Oliver Stone and historian Peter Kuznick, as they sit down with us to discuss US foreign policy and the Obama administration's disregard for the rule of law.
Posted December 29, 2012
In October of this year, I gave two talks in Missouri discussing 9/11, challenging the official narrative. Certainly I talked about the fall of the Towers and WTC7, but there is more to it than that. May I emphasize areas that are evidence-based and that I find also important in our discussions of 9/11:
1. How the government lied about factual dangers of the WTC dust, how thousands of people were in fact hurt by the WTC dust (see below);
2. The whistleblower testimony of Sec'y of Transportation Norman Mineta (50 miles out, 30 miles out, etc., reported to Dick Cheney);
3. The lack of air defenses that day, including at the Pentagon (2 and 3 are generally all I say about the Pentagon);
4. The whistleblower testimony of Sec'y of Treasury Paul O'Neill (he noted -from day one it was about getting us into Iraq; his opposing pre-emptive war, and how he was canned by Dick Cheney);
5. The whistleblower testimonies of Kevin Ryan, April Gallop, Susan Lindauer and Sibel Edmonds;
6. The attempts to discredit/marginalize whistleblowers (including myself) that also speaks of conspiracy to cover-up facts regarding 9/11;
7. Historical use of false-flag events by Germany, USA, and others to further political agendas; the Big Lie principle and why many people hesitate to question "official narratives";
8. The strange coincidence that emergency gear and hundreds of personnel were assembled in Manhattan on 9/10/01 (the day BEFORE the tragedy);
9. The destruction of evidence, that over 99.5% of the steel from the Towers and WTC7 was shipped to Asia for melting, contrary to the protests of scientists and engineers;
10. The remarkable growth and efforts of AE911Truth.org -- with over 1,700 architects and engineers and over 16,000 supporters now calling for an investigation. When questions arise about Judy Wood's book on DEW, I often refer to the FAQ at AE911Truth on this subject: http://www.ae911truth.org/news-section/41-articles/505-ae911truth-faq-6-whats-your-assessment-of-the-directed-energy-weapo... .
11. Public polls show that large numbers of the public question the "official 9/11 story." We are making progress despite the opposition.
Original Contribution | December 19, 2012
Association Between World Trade Center Exposure and Excess Cancer Risk
Jiehui Li, MBBS, MSc; James E. Cone, MD, MPH; Amy R. Kahn, MS; Robert M. Brackbill, PhD, MPH; Mark R. Farfel, ScD; Carolyn M. Greene, MD; James L. Hadler, MD, MPH; Leslie T. Stayner, PhD; Steven D. Stellman, PhD, MPH
[+] Author Affiliations
JAMA. 2012;308(23):2479-2488. doi:10.1001/jama.2012.110980.
Context The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, resulted in the release of known and suspected carcinogens into the environment. There is public concern that exposures may have resulted in increased cancers.
Objective To evaluate cancer incidence among persons enrolled in the World Trade Center Health Registry.
A suprisingly balanced approach to the subject of 9/11 truth graffiti on Connecticut highways.
Abby Martin talks to the Editor of Boiling Frogs Post and Founder of the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition, Sibel Edmonds, about her story as a whistleblower, the government intentionally thwarting evidence in order to ensure the 9/11 attacks, the TSA and the erosion of civil liberties in a post 9/11 America.
Following the publication of the paper "Anomalies of the air defense on 9/11" (see here: http://www.journalof911studies.com/resources/Schreyer-Vol-33-Oct2012.pdf ) in October 2012 a discussion started between author Paul Schreyer and Miles Kara, former professional staff member of the 9/11 Commisson, assigned to their "Team 8", investigating the air defense on 9/11. Kara also published an article about this in November 2012 (see here: http://www.oredigger61.org/?p=5747 ).
Following the core points of this discussion, based on 7 questions Schreyer raised, published now with the approval of both at 9/11 Blogger and at JREF.
Paul Schreyer: The time of Scoggins´ first call to NEADS - I have it in my paper on page 6, lower part. What do you make of this? When did this call happen?
Richard Gage New 10-minute Showcase Video
Published on Dec 15, 2012
The showcase was pre--recorded for this third of three APCA conferences attended by AE911Truth because Gage was invited to testify concurrently at a pre--hearing for an international crimes
'Don't Mention This to Anyone': Why Did American Airlines Suppress News of the First Hijacking on 9/11?
American Airlines employees who were dealing with phone calls made by two flight attendants on Flight 11--the first plane to be hijacked on September 11, 2001--were told by their superiors to keep quiet about what they had learned about the unfolding crisis. At a time when the airline should have been alerting as many people as possible to the serious incident that the flight attendants were describing, senior personnel were instead issuing instructions such as "Don't spread this around" and "I don't want this spread all over this office right now."
Furthermore, airline employees who were aware of the flight attendants' calls were remarkably slow to pass on what they knew to individuals and agencies that should have been alerted as a matter of urgency, such as the FBI, the FAA, and even American Airlines senior managers.
The long run of Rudi Dekkers, 56, the Dutch national who first passed out bunks to Mohamed Atta and Marwan Al-Shehhi when they arrived in the United States to enroll at Huffman Aviation in Venice, Florida, ended last week when he was arrested for drug trafficking in Houston.
'Truther' group that questions 9/11 attacks 'adopts' stretch of Missouri highway By James Eng, NBC News
'Truther' group that questions 9/11 attacks 'adopts' stretch of Missouri highway
By James Eng, NBC News
The Missouri Department of Transportation says it had no choice but to approve an application by a 9/11 “truther” group to “adopt” a stretch of state highway for litter pickup.
The agency recently OK’d the application from the St. Louis 9/11 Questions Meetup Group under the Adopt-A-Highway program. The approval means the group will have two signs bearing their names erected next month on each end of a half-mile stretch of Olive Boulevard east of Lindbergh Road in the St. Louis area.
In return, the group agrees to pick up litter along the stretch at least four times a year for the next three years.
Some members of the St. Louis 9/11 Questions Meetup Group suggest that the U.S. government may have been involved in the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Here's how the group describes itself on its website:
“We are residents of the Greater St. Louis Area (and other areas) concerned about the many disturbing aspects of the 9/11 attacks and interested in finding out more about those events. We have many disagreements, but we agree that 9/11 is worth inquiring into.”
Holly Dentner, a state Transportation Department spokeswoman, said the state can’t turn away a group’s Adopt-A-Highway application based on the group’s viewpoints. As long as the applicant fulfills the program’s obligations, which include collecting litter at least four times a year and submitting an activity report to the state, it can participate, she said.
9/11 Truth is gaining steam in North Carolina as "Experts Speak Out" airs on local television stations throughout the state. I (RL McGee) put this documentary on public access station GPAT-23 in Greenville / Pitt County last week. It will run for several weeks at various time spots.
This was super-easy to do. There was no annual fee to become a producer and no orientation class to attend. I didn't even have to mail them a DVD since the station agreed to download the program from online! I just filled out 2 forms (Local Producer form and Program form) and mailed them in. Then I emailed the website for accessing the 1 hour version of ESO.
It has also recently aired in Chapel Hill, Carrboro and Durham thanks to Bette Smith. Starting in Chapel Hill in late October, The People's Channel has shown this breakthrough documentary by AE911Truth continuously in Chapel Hill / Orange County, and then its sister station aired the documentary in Carrboro in early November. Soon after Durham Community Media came on board and has been airing "Experts Speak Out" since mid-November in Durham County, NC.
Recent air times:
Nearly two years after Zadroga bill signed, Ground Zero workers and others sickened or injured in 9/11 attacks haven't been paid
By Susan Edelman
December 9, 2012
Ground Zero responders and lower Manhattan residents sickened or injured in the 9/11 attacks can forget about any financial help from Uncle Sam before the holidays.
Nearly two years after President Obama signed the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act on Jan. 2, 2011, no one has gotten a dime.
“We’re going into the third year of the law, and the fact that no one’s been compensated after eight years of hard work to get the bill passed is unacceptable,” fumed Ground Zero advocate John Feal.
Congress appropriated $2.7 billion for a reopened Victim Compensation Fund to dole out $875 million in the first five years and the rest in 2016.
So far, 15,000 firefighters, cops, hardhats and others who lived, worked or went to school downtown have registered as potential claimants. But only 1,500 have filed applications, officials told The Post.
This is an explosion…
There are no intact floors above the advancing collapse line. The concrete and debris are immediately pulverized and ejected sideways along with other parts of the structure including heavy beams that go on to destroy neighboring buildings.
There is no ‘pile-driver’ effect as is evidenced by this photo and further confirmed by the arrested angular momentum of the upper floors in the south tower.
The collapse proceeds through the strongest part of the building, the center structural core, at nearly free-fall acceleration. As you might suspect, this can only mean the center structural support was taken out prior to this collapse.
I can’t think of any way this could happen without an internal detonation, perhaps carefully timed to be masked by the crash of the plane.
There is no reason for what we see here and what we witnessed in the next 15 seconds. None is given. NIST gave up. Maybe you can fill us in :).
How to Prosecute the 9/11 War Crimes - Panel Discussion at the 9/11 Revisited Conference in Malaysia
How to Prosecute the 9/11 War Crimes - Panel Discussion at the 9/11 Revisited Conference in Malaysia
Published on Dec 5, 2012 by corbettreport
Prof. Gurdial Singh Nijar of the University of Malaya leads a panel discussion on how to prosecute the war crimes of 9/11 at the "9/11 Revisited: Seeking the Truth" conference in Kuala Lumpur on November 19, 2012.
International Conference on "9/11 Revisited -- Seeking the Truth" (19.11.2012)
It is with great excitement that I announce the release of the Final Report of the Toronto Hearings, which is titled The 9/11 Toronto Report. It is now available for purchase on Amazon.com, for a reduced introductory price of $12.76. I encourage you to review the content of the book using Amazon's "Look Inside" feature, and if you like the book, leave a positive five-star review. The book has already received a one-star review from someone who has not read the book, and we need to counteract these kinds of reviews.
The 9/11 Toronto Report is a collection of essays submitted by the witnesses who presented at the International Hearings on the Events of September 11, 2001, which were held in Toronto, Canada over the 10th Anniversary of the attacks. I collected the essays, edited them, and arranged them into the chapters you find in the book. I believe it is the most succinct, comprehensive, and persuasive written treatment of the best evidence against the official story for 9/11 that has been produced to date. Those experts who contributed chapters include David Ray Griffin, Kevin Ryan, Peter Dale Scott, Graeme MacQueen, David Chandler, Barbara Honegger, Richard Gage and many others.
The 9/11 Toronto Report also contains a written report and recommendation from each of the four distinguished panelists who heard the evidence presented over the four days of hearings and questioned the witnesses. The panelists include two eminent Canadian academics, an American civil engineer and academic, and the most famous and influential judge in Italy and honorary president of the Italian Supreme Court, Ferdinando Imposimato. As you will read in the final chapters of the Report, the opinions of these four individuals, each of which carries credibility and weight that cannot be disputed, make a clear and unmistakable case that the official account of 9/11 is false, and that the only way to realize truth and accountability is to tear down the wall of secrecy and lies that has been erected by the United States government around the events of 9/11.
November 28, 2012
(Sacramento, CA) 9/11 Truth activist Mark Graham sent a letter to the 12 insurance companies for the airline defendants sued by Larry Silverstein informing them about evidence of controlled demolition of the Twin Towers and Building 7 and offering to put them in touch with building experts who could provide expert testimony.
In 2004 Larry Silverstein, who owned Building 7 and had signed a 99 year lease on the Twin Towers just six weeks before 9/11, sued United and American Airlines 1 and companies providing security at the airports (the "airline defendants"). Silverstein claimed that the airline defendants 2 had been negligent in allowing the hijackers to board and hijack the planes and fly them into the Twin Towers. He claimed that the plane crashes and fires "proximately caused the total destruction" of the Twin Towers, Building 7 and the other buildings in the World Trade Center. (Complaint in Case 1:08-cv-03722-AKH Document 1 Filed 04/17/08, page 2) 3
No mention has been made of the fact that it would have been impossible for those plane crashes and fires to have destroyed the buildings or the abundant evidence of controlled demolition. The defense attorneys could make an affirmative defense of this argument and exculpatory evidence.
Graham sent his letter via certified mail to the heads of 12 insurance companies who insured the airline defendants including Lloyd’s of America, Travelers Cos, Swiss Re, Zurich American, Global Aerospace and U.S. Aircraft Insurance Group and to their attorneys.
At the Journal of 9/11 Studies, we have published a new article and a new letter. That makes 2012 as productive as our past three years at the journal combined.
This month's article is from Dr. Andre Rousseau and is titled "Were Explosives the Source of the Seismic Signals Emitted from New York on September 11, 2001?"
The conclusion states: "Near the times of the planes' impacts into the Twin Towers and during their collapses, as well as during the collapse of WTC7, seismic waves were generated. To the degree that (1) seismic waves are created only by brief impulses and (2) low frequencies are associated with energy of a magnitude that is comparable to a seismic event, the waves recorded at Palisades and analyzed by LDEO undeniably have an explosive origin. Even if the planes' impacts and the fall of the debris from the Towers onto the ground could have generated seismic waves, their magnitude would have been insufficient to be recorded 34 km away and should have been very similar in the two cases to one another. As we have shown, they were not."
The letter is in response to an article that was previously published at the journal. It is from Tod Fletcher and Dr. Tim Eastman, and is called " The Pentagon Attack in Context: a Reply to John Wyndham."
Here is an excerpt: "A broad-based analysis is needed to understand the Pentagon events – an analysis that is based on the full range of available evidence and therefore cannot be exclusively scientific in a narrow sense. This is especially important due to the fact that physical, quantifiable evidence is extremely limited, while there are multiple related events and information that can contribute helpfully to addressing (and providing context for) the problem. Thus, we have emphasized the superiority of a systematic contextual approach that builds effectively on such related information, and the need to treat the limited available evidence within its associated context. Further, we have emphasized the need to leverage the best established results, including attention to the likely means, opportunities, and motives of perpetrators."
In December, we expect to have more to share.
Kevin Ryan and Graeme MacQueen