9/11 Tipping Point

Here's an encouraging article on how best to promote the truth. Find out what you're good at and do it. Notice, nowhere in this article does it say arguing amongst each other is an effective way of spreading the truth.

Post your own ideas in the comments below...
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2006/02/911-tipping-point.html

Many people want to spread the truth about 9/11, but don't know how to do so.

Of course, it partly depends on where your talents lie. If you're a good writer but are shy around people, then write letters to the editor of your local paper. Or if you're a talented researcher, then find an aspect of 9/11 that hasn't been discovered or documented before, to help fill in a missing piece of the puzzle.

If you don't mind talking to people, then I have some advice for you. Sociological studies show that it is especially helpful to concentrate efforts to persuade on the following types of people:

• People who have alot of friends or contacts

• People who are in positions of influence (such as ministers, rabbis, community and business leaders)

-or-

• People who are just plain talented at persuading others.

Studies show that these are the type of people who make social changes happen, that convert trends from small potatoes to national movements. These are the kinds of people that make "tipping points" happen where things start to snowball.

So your assignment, should you choose to accept it, is to inform the above-described kinds of people about the most hard-hitting facts about 9/11. If you would like a potential source for such hard-hitting facts, look here.

If we present the hardest-hitting 9/11 facts to these types of folks, we will create a "tipping point" that will make 9/11 truth an unstoppable national movement.

Thank you for this blog. I

Thank you for this blog. I live in Holland and here about everybody believes 9/11 was done by Osama. So at this very moment I am writing a letter with links to 9/11 sites.
I want to send this to my friends and ask them to make it a chain-letter. I will also sent it to some left-wing weblogs, political web-logs and newspapers.
Thanks to Internet 9/11 will never be the same as the Reichstagfire. As more people are informed about the truth, the better is the chance to put this fire out in time.
Now I might translate my letter in English as well, if you can help me to turn it into a chain. If so, please contact me.
With love from Holland,
Bou

Maxim 9/11 article(need to

Maxim 9/11 article(need to sub)

What Really Brought Down the Towers?

As major questions surrounding the official version of the truth emerge, “What really happened on 9/11?” is becoming the “Who shot JFK?” of a new generation. How crazy are the new conspiracy theories? Depends how far down the rabbit hole you’re willing to go.

Few of these guys simply talk. More accurately what they do is spew. Like a printer cranking out multiple copies of a statistical prospectus, they seem hellbent on spitting out every fact, figure, and thread of conjecture in their heads before the paper tray runs dry. About Dick Cheney’s connection to the strangely prescient right-wing Project for the New American Century think tank. About Mohamed Atta’s U.S. intelligence connections and love of pork chops and strippers. About implausible demolition patterns observed at the World Trade Center on that fateful morning.

“There are so many problems with the official story of 9/11, it’s hard to know where to start,” says Sander Hicks, a 34-year-old independent publisher from Brooklyn whose “middle-of-the-road Christian values” father marched with Martin Luther King Jr. in the 1960s. “A person of intellectual honesty cannot embrace that story.”On September 11, 2001, the World Trade Center collapsed in an implosion of concrete, flying steel, and human bodies. In Washington, D.C., the Pentagon suffered a giant, blackened gash in a recently renovated section. Meanwhile, United Airlines Flight 93 plummeted into a rural Pennsylvania field, killing everyone on board.

Just about everyone agrees on that much. Four years later, however, a growing and increasingly prominent group of Americans believes that a government conspiracy is the only explanation of “the new Pearl Harbor” that makes any sense. Armed with a spate of books, compelling videos, and a recent high-profile ad campaign, the loose community that some call the 9/11 Truth Movement has moved from the shadowy basements of the Internet out into the open. Across the board, the movement operates on the conviction that the U.S. government is keeping the whole truth under wraps. And that it either planned or allowed 9/11 to happen as a pretext for invading Afghanistan and Iraq and rolling back civil liberties at home.

“It’s become a cause,” says Jimmy Walter, the millionaire who runs reopen911.org. Walter is blowing stacks of cash on cable TV spots and full-page ads in The New York Times, plus funding the free distribution of DVDs (more than 365,000 so far, he says), to demand new investigations into the attacks. “It’s hard to say it feels good, but it actually does feel good to stand up and be a patriot.”

While Walter may be the Truth Movement’s most prominent promoter (see sidebar), it’s not a one-man crusade: Just check out the six million hits on a Google search for “9/11 conspiracy.” Or a 2004 CNN.com poll in which 89 percent of respondents said they believe there’s a U.S. government cover-up surrounding 9/11.

The surest sign of the conspiracy movement’s growing momentum: opposition. Two major magazines, Popular Mechanics and Scientific American, recently devoted features to debunking various 9/11 conspiracy theories. In September 2005, a book by two British journalists, titled 9/11 Revealed, prompted the U.S. State Department to post a detailed critique of the authors’ “absurd, sinister interpretations” on the agency Web site.

“That’s the first time the government has ever taken notice of any alternative ideas,” says David Ray Griffin, professor emeritus of philosophy at California’s Claremont School of Theology, who dropped his respected and prolific scholarly work to write 9/11 conspiracy books (The New Pearl Harbor, The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions). “We all thought that was a pretty big step.”

In fact, the government had refuted earlier 9/11 rumors. But the movement has an answer for everything. One might ask, for instance, wasn’t it the threat of WMDs, not 9/11, that sold the American public on the need for war in Iraq?

“September 11 was very important to Iraq because it squelched domestic dissent,” explains Hicks. “They waged the invasion of Iraq on the heels of the Afghanistan invasion, which conveyed the sense that we were unbeatable. You’ve got to remember the context.” In other words, it all fits together—if you listen carefully to the way they tell it.

Theory #1
There were no suicidal Islamic hijackers.

The case: In the days after 9/11, Americans came to know and hate the 19 terrorists, commanded by a nefarious Egyptian named Mohamed Atta, who used box cutters and a perverted version of Islam to hijack airplanes, level the towers, smash up the Pentagon, and bring the United States to a virtual standstill. But what if they actually had nothing to do with it? Some of the most sensational 9/11 conspiracy theories insist that Atta and company were framed.

“The jets were controlled by advanced robotics and remote-control technology, not hijackers,” insists Carol A. Valentine on her Web site public-action.com, which peddles a wide range of conspiracy theories. Hang on, it gets wilder.

Elaborate umbrella theories involve the use of multiple decoy planes, remote-controlled commuter jets packed with explosives, and manipulated passenger lists. The most incendiary idea: that all four “hijacked” planes were secretly directed to a U.S. Air Force base, where all their passengers were loaded onto United Flight 93, the plane that went down in Pennsylvania. Some variations of other theories tie in here, including claims that the story of hero passengers thwarting the terrorists on Flight 93 was, amazingly, fabricated, cell phone calls and all.

Fuel for the fire: Some say the four 9/11 planes’ light passenger loads—the most crowded had 81 aboard, while Flight 93 had just 37—suggest someone deliberately capped ticketing for the four flights. As for the hijackers themselves, conspiracy theorists cite numerous media reports of alleged 9/11 jihadists (or at least Arab dudes with the same names) turning up alive after the attacks. And the U.S. military just happened to be running a number of war games that morning, including some that, according to conspiracy proponents, could have deliberately confused response to the attacks.

Believe it or not? To believe this (and many 9/11 conspiracy theories), you have to believe that the government is evil enough to cook up a head-spinningly complicated plot against its own people in its largest city. Once you make that leap, remote-controlled decoy planes don’t seem that far-fetched.

Theory #2
Explosives—not planes—really brought down the World Trade Center towers.

The case: On March 26, 2000, more than 4,450 pounds of gelatin-based nitroglycerine, linked by 21.6 miles of orange detonation cord that burned at 24,000 feet per second, was ignited in Seattle. Barely 17 seconds later, the monstrous Kingdome—400-plus tons of structural steel and 52,800 cubic yards of concrete—crumpled neatly to the ground in a controlled demolition. Almost as if by magic, the damage was limited to the dome’s own footprint.

Is it odd that the collapse of the Twin Towers looked eerily similar to just that kind of pre-arranged job? Conspiracy theorists think so. Rejecting the official story—that 1,800-degree infernos sparked by burning fuel fatally weakened the Towers’ steel support beams—they say planted explosives destroyed the buildings.

“It’s undeniable,” says Jim Hoffman of 911research.com. “There’s never been a fire-induced collapse of a steel-framed building before.” William Rodriguez, a 20-year WTC maintenance worker, insists he heard and felt a massive explosion in the basement floors—”I thought a generator blew up”—just before the first plane struck. He is suing George Bush and others for “knowingly failing to warn of 9/11.”

A video on reopen911.org uses red arrows to track supposed “mysterious explosions” within one tower as it collapses. Conspiracists agree that two airplanes hit the WTC, but point to the towers’ rapid fall and the fact that the massive buildings “pancaked” straight down into their own foundations as evidence of other forces at work. Lots of attention goes to World Trade Center 7, a 47-story building that was not struck by a plane, but also collapsed upon itself hours after the attacks.

Fuel for the fire: The implosions were highly unusual, as the magazine Fire Engineering pointed out in 2002. Brigham Young University physics professor Steven Jones, who recently released a scientific paper questioning the cause of the Twin Towers’ collapse, notes that even FEMA concluded the official reasons for WTC7’s collapse had “a low probability of occurrence.”

Believe it or not? In Popular Mechanics’ anticonspiracy feature, engineers say steel doesn’t need to melt to lose its structural integrity. And for this theory to work, you have to believe that someone could booby-trap some of the world’s busiest buildings without anyone noticing.

Theory #3
American Airlines Flight 77 never crashed into the Pentagon.

The case: Officially, terrorists piloted American Airlines Flight 77 into America’s military headquarters. But if you watch “Pentagon Strike,” a hair-raising video widely circulated on the Internet, you see a much different version of events.

Set to a throbbing backbeat of ominous techno, the video fires a barrage of questions and statemen

What "truth" is being

What "truth" is being promoted?

There is a lot of speculation, debate, and hypotheses being presented, but I fail to see how one can claim, absent firm evidence, that any "truth" has been established beyond doubt.

so S.King, i noticed you yet

so S.King, i noticed you yet again failed to answer very simple questions i posed. why run away from a simple question? i know its not your protocal to do anything but type the same "the government wouldnt lie about 9/11, they are telling the whole truth" bullshit on every post, but i figured you had the brain capacity to answer some basic questions. so here goes:are you 100% satisfied with The 9/11 Commission Reports findings? do you feel they exsausted all avenues and and followed ALL leads to get the whole story? do you think the "investigation" into 9/11 was complete and satisfactory? come on S.King, i know you can do it, these are very basic questions.im just trying to see where your coming from.

I agree with Chris. S.King,

I agree with Chris. S.King, you've been very disruptive until now, please answer the question. Are you satisfied with the 9/11 report?

he wont answer, but i gotta

he wont answer, but i gotta keep trying anyway. it proves my point that hes a drone with an agenda. the guy is clearly a shill who isnt capable of doing anything but touting the governments line.i hope he gets paid well to be such a hack.

The Maxim Article is a

The Maxim Article is a misleading sketch consisting of numerous half-truths. Available details that would make these half-truths honest & complete are conspicuously omitted. The goal is to depict many compelling facts about 9-11 in a half-baked manner, so as to manufacture doubt & destroy credibility.

it may be misleading and

it may be misleading and woefully incomplete,and it may take on the typical tone of "those crazy conspiracy theorists",but at the same time, you have to remember that those of us who strongly question 9/11 are in the minority right now, and this is ultimately progress for us.Maxim is a mainstream magazine with a shitload of readers. this at least exposes them to the fact that there IS a movement that questions the governments account of 9/11.thats a good thing in my book,regardless of what you think of the article.(and i agree,it is a weak ass article,but this IS progress.the fact that a 9/11 story showed up in Maxim shows we are making a difference.)

if this story didnt appear

if this story didnt appear in Maxim,many of its readers still might now even know there was a movement out there questioning 9/11.i guess thats my point in saying this article is a good thing ultimately,despite its negative tone and misleading manner.

somebigguy wrote... "I agree

somebigguy wrote...

"I agree with Chris. S.King, you've been very disruptive until now, please answer the question. Are you satisfied with the 9/11 report?"

Disruptive? I've actually shown that there are valid questions for assumptions you all make.

Like my post responding to Fetzer's strawman argument.

And, if you had read carefully, I made it clear to Chris that I am addressing claims on the collapses of the WTC towers.

He knows that.

Chris wrote... "he wont

Chris wrote...

"he wont answer, but i gotta keep trying anyway."

I answered yesterday.

answer me now, our comments

answer me now, our comments got erased. go ahead, i asked you 3 simple questions, go up and look them over, then answer. thanks.

One thing that is definitely

One thing that is definitely true is the official story is not the truth, and considering how many lies and holes make up the Commission Report, and how hard the media, Congress and the Executive are working to deny there's any problems w/ the official story, to obstruct investigations and cover up evidence, they have something to hide- what is it? The odds are slim it's not their own involvement, due to all the evidence 9/11 couldn't have been pulled off w/o inside help- air defense failures, controlled demo, ignored warnings, Secret Service not insisting Bush leave the photo op, ISI wired $100,000 to Atta, etc, etc.

We're all true believers here, S King- you might have better luck running around telling people who haven't read Griffin's books or looked at the real 9/11 expose sites that they'll go blind and crazy if they do.

And, if you had read

And, if you had read carefully, I made it clear to Chris that I am addressing claims on the collapses of the WTC towers.

He knows that.
S. King | 02.17.06 - 10:40 am | #
i dont care what your going on about, its the same thing in every post. thats nice. you think the towers fell from jet fuel. we get it. now answer my 3 simple questions if it doesnt hurt your head too much. thanks.

i find it amusing you cant

i find it amusing you cant answer such simple questions,and you are only capable of talking about the towers collapse.i never argued with you about that. in fact, i never even mentioned the towers collapse to you once.

here,i'll post them again so

here,i'll post them again so you dont have to strain your brain:are you 100% satisfied with The 9/11 Commission Reports findings? do you feel they exsausted all avenues and and followed ALL leads to get the whole story? do you think the "investigation" into 9/11 was complete and satisfactory? come on S.King, i know you can do it, these are very basic questions.im just trying to see where your coming from.
Chris | 02.17.06 - 9:31 am | #

I just read the Maxim thing-

I just read the Maxim thing- this is really weak as a "hit" piece, seems like it might prompt as many people to go looking for info as to go back to sleep. Wonder if they wrote it in response to reader demand? My favorite part:

"Four years later, however, a growing and increasingly prominent group of Americans believes that a government conspiracy is the only explanation of “the new Pearl Harbor” that makes any sense. Armed with a spate of books, compelling videos, and a recent high-profile ad campaign, the loose community that some call the 9/11 Truth Movement has moved from the shadowy basements of the Internet out into the open. Across the board, the movement operates on the conviction that the U.S. government is keeping the whole truth under wraps. And that it either planned or allowed 9/11 to happen as a pretext for invading Afghanistan and Iraq and rolling back civil liberties at home."

We are definitely moving past the being ignored and the laughed at stages, they're fighting the truth movement now- next, we win (paraphrasing Ghandi)

It's easy to believe our govt. could be this evil- 9/11 wasn't anything new for this govt or for govts period- fake threats have been used by leaders for thousands of years to suppress dissent and drum up support for wars of conquest. If Prez Bullshit will lie about WMD so he can attack Iraq, killing thousands of US soldiers and possibly a 1/4 million Iraqi civs so far, why wouldn't he do 9/11? Of course, it's not him, he's too stupid- he's just a mushroom to those hidden figures managing the military-corporate complex

exactly my point erik, while

exactly my point erik, while the piece is very weak in any 9/11 activists eyes, it might spark the uninformed to go looking for some answers on their own.thats why i said its ultimately a good thing.

"Four years later, however,

"Four years later, however, a growing and increasingly prominent group of Americans believes that a government conspiracy is the only explanation of “the new Pearl Harbor” that makes any sense. Armed with a spate of books, compelling videos, and a recent high-profile ad campaign, the loose community that some call the 9/11 Truth Movement has moved from the shadowy basements of the Internet out into the open. Across the board, the movement operates on the conviction that the U.S. government is keeping the whole truth under wraps. And that it either planned or allowed 9/11 to happen as a pretext for invading Afghanistan and Iraq and rolling back civil liberties at home."

Yes, this is probably the best part of the article and will hopefully persuade some people to look further into 9-11.

thanks for the maxim text..

thanks for the maxim text.. ill get the scans up tonight.. what does the cover look like?

it has Kristen Bell from

it has Kristen Bell from Veronica Mars on the cover looking pretty hot.

Those are three very simple

Those are three very simple yes/no questions being asked. Take a few seconds out of your life.

erik wrote... "We're all

erik wrote...

"We're all true believers here, S King- you might have better luck running around telling people who haven't read Griffin's books or looked at the real 9/11 expose sites that they'll go blind and crazy if they do."

Actually, it's far more productive to point out to those who have read Griffin's books and believe all the 9/11 Denial Movement sites, what the problems are with them.

Invaribly, those "true believers" have never considered that they may have been built on a house of cards.

That should be apparent from the reactions I get when I expose little cracks in "true believers'" beliefs.

You'll note the silence when I exposed Fetzer yesterday - no one argued the point. That's a good sign. If you guys are adept at "questionning", you ought question those people like Fetzer and Jones who have been less than honest with you.

But when I do, people here get very defensive, calling me such lame things as a "shill for the government." They want to make me the issue instead of getting to the truth.

Hey S King, guess what...I

Hey S King, guess what...I see some of the same holes in some of the theorists claims, JUST as I see MAJOR holes in the official story. Are you syaing the government is telling the full truth on 9/11, and there are no unanswered questions? Funny, there's many people in politics and intelligence who believe there is a massive coverup. Ever heard of Able Danger? FBI whistleblowers?

Also folks, notice how the skeptics inveritably focus in on WTC towers and Pentagon...why? BECAUSE THEY KNOW the government had total foreknowlege, and they cannot disporve that.

Anyways, loved that blog article about spreading the truth. I would only add to that to try and not push too many assumptions, try to base things on what we know when possible. Through online comics, blogs and even music I've been spreading 9/11 Truth in various amounts to folks. I agree with Maxim, only in their contention that this is like the new JFK...only, this time the truth will be coming out sooner rather than later.

here,i'll post them again so

here,i'll post them again so you dont have to strain your brain:are you 100% satisfied with The 9/11 Commission Reports findings? do you feel they exsausted all avenues and and followed ALL leads to get the whole story? do you think the "investigation" into 9/11 was complete and satisfactory? come on S.King, i know you can do it, these are very basic questions.im just trying to see where your coming from.
Chris | 02.17.06 - 9:31 am | #

> Notice, nowhere in this

> Notice, nowhere in this article does it say arguing amongst each other is an effective way of spreading the truth.

That's very true, and I wish it could be that easy, but if some among us are spreading disinfo loudly, and drowning out the truth, their noise (for eg, all the misstatements and mislabeling and manufactured confusion regarding Bush's very highly incriminating witness statements, which serves to help let Bush off the hook for them) must be addressed.

The long-standing keeper(s) of that divisive "bogus" list are the main original true dividers, and those who find themselves on it should never be suppressed from disagreeing with it and the big bogus divisiveness it embodies.

> > Or if you're a talented researcher, then find an aspect of 9/11 that hasn't been discovered or documented before, to help fill in a missing piece of the puzzle.

That's precisely what 911blimp.net set out to do, and did, and does. Some well-known "911 truth" sites immediately embraced it and said they'd link to it, but then they never did. I gave those people about 10 months to keep their word before I ever began sharing what I was learning about the fake 911truthers (I wanted the links, but it eventually became apparent that they would never come, especially after www.communitycurrency.org responded to a 10-month reminder/request by spreading viscious lies about me -- note that 911blimp.net still links to some of those sites but none of them can link to 911blimp.net (primarily) because 911blimp.net addresses evidence they do not want to become known, and they deem themselves worthy and fit to decide what forbidden 911 thoughts people should not be able to consider).

So, after being a totally nice guy about it for a very long time, and having been lied to, and about, by some self-proclaimed 911truthers, I decided that it would be wrong of me to keep their dirty laundry hidden from other 911truthers who may not recognize how systematically divisively THE WEB SITES behave, nor recognize that the least divisive-sounding people maintain (are part of a sizable ring of) very divisive, marginalizing web sites. (Only last year, once Google's link-farming-detection algorithm became sufficiently sophisticated to catch wise to their ways did www.911blimp.net begin to seriously break out of their long-very-effective box. Given the head-start the govt's 911 lies have enjoyed for years, I did not appreciate that added delay... But to this day, a lot of 911 truthers remain inclined to mislabel/devalue/discard/dismiss/ignore some of our best evidence, and that is so sad.)

I sometimes find this a good forum for sharing such info when it can be done on-topic. Divisiveness really does suck, but ignoring it, and giving the big, systematic dividers a free pass, didn't work.
______________________________________

"You'll note the silence

"You'll note the silence when I exposed Fetzer yesterday - no one argued the point. That's a good sign. If you guys are adept at "questionning", you ought question those people like Fetzer and Jones who have been less than honest with you."
S. King

"Actually, it's far more productive to point out to those who have read Griffin's books and believe all the 9/11 Denial Movement sites, what the problems are with them."
S. King

Is this guy from the CIA or what? Why associate Jones w/ Fetzer? Because he's w/ st9/11, of course! Was Michael Green right? I'm starting to see people using things Fetzer has said to discredit st9/11 and associate Jones with it. This is exactly what everyone should be expecting. The Chinese apparaently have 30,000+ internet cops, the MSM here are all corporate directed and the Pentagon has been planting propaganda in foreign newspapers. Of course they're out in force planting disinfo and sowing discord in the 9/11 Truth Movement. It's part of the plan, they do it with every coverup. Really, no one can be trusted, people can be intimidated and bought at any time.

But the truth is not on the side of the 9/11 criminals and we don't need the media to get out the truth and get justice- the criminals can't stop us- they're afraid of public opinion, and the people's will- all we need to do is tell our friends, family, co-workers, strangers, real world and cyberspace, everyone who will listen, enough to make them realize we live in a post-9/11 world, only the terrorists are those are running our govt, the same ones who've been ravaging our resources and economy, blowing our tax dollars on their selfish ends and racking up debt to further enslave the middle class and the poor, and these people need to be exposed, convicted and punished or our Republic is over. And of course, they'll make war on us before they give up control of the system- the more people know 9/11 was an inside job, the less likely they'll be able to get away with the next one.

"In the councils of

"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist." - excerpt, Eisenhower's Farewell Address to the Nation

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." - William Colby, Former Director of CIA

"The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists" - J. Edgar Hoover

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is
for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke