New Podcasts for your enjoyment
Somebigguy Wed, 04/05/2006 - 3:27am
Here are a few more for you, spread them around and let me know if you have any trouble with them:
- Charlie Sheen Coverage on Access Hollywood: Subscribe | View
- Bob McIlvaine Interviewed by Jon Gold: Subscribe | View
- The Great Conspiracy: Subscribe | View
- David Ray Griffin at Grand Lake Theater: Subscribe | Listen
If you have any suggestions for Podcasts you'd like to see, let us know...
- Login to post comments
Finally details on that
Finally details on that Chicago 911 Truth event. I cant wait to meet Jones (BYU), Hoffman, Tarpley, etc. Hopefully Griffin will be added!
Seems like everyone is going
Seems like everyone is going to that Chicago event, looking forward to it...
oopps. Just saw you have a
oopps. Just saw you have a headline on it below. I caught it on the sidebar first. Hope to see you guys there. I need to get my 911blogger shirts before then for sure.
War
War
- Alex Jones launches the
- Alex Jones launches the Jones Report, Ã la Drudge Report
- The Infowars.com crew confronts Thomas Kean of the 9/11 Commission (videos included there)
I just noticed that the
I just noticed that the jonesreport.com domain name was registered in 2001, so it might not be that new...
NICE Alex!!! I'm
NICE Alex!!! I'm downloading the Tom Kean confrontation now.
heh...The Jones
heh...The Jones Report...what The Drudge Report should be.
He probably just held the domain for a few years. I'm reserving a couple for later use.
Did Thomas Kean deny knowing
Did Thomas Kean deny knowing anything about the $100,000 Wire transfer?
http://*.org/questions.html
Here is question #22 on the list of questions submitted by the family members.
22) On the issue of state sponsored terrorism:
· Why did Mahmood Ahmed, Director of Pakistan's secret service, the (ISI) order Saeed Sheikh to wire $100,000 to hijacker Mohamed Atta?
· What was Mahmood Ahmed's relationship with Al Qaeda?
· Where did the money come from?
· Did officials in Pakistan know in advance about the terrorist attack?
· On September 11 th , Mahmood Ahmed had a breakfast meeting in Washington, D.C., with House and Senate Intelligence Committee chairmen, Rep. Porter Goss and Senator Bob Graham. What were they discussing?
Does ANYONE know where there is a statement about the wire transfer from the commission? I know Kyle Hence confronted Lee Hamilton on it, and he brushed it off.
http://www.washtimes.com/upi-
http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breaking/20040726-013340-4811r.htm
On May 15, 2003, a group of 9/11 victims' relatives met with the commission co-chairman Thomas Kean and other senior staff and submitted a list of questions, which included a mention of Lt. Gen. Mahmoud Ahmed. A June 17, 2004, the New York Times reported that Lorie Van Auken, whose husband died in the World Trade Center, was "irate" that the June 16 commission narrative of the 9/11 attacks did not even mention the allegation about Ahmed's role in the $100,000 transfer to Mohammed Atta. Clearly, the ISI link is no mere conspiracy theory.
One possible explanation for the commission's reluctance to cover the ISI angle could be that the panel investigated, found nothing solid, and decided not to embarrass a key ally in the "war on terror." But that theory does not explain why the 9/11 commission exonerated Saudi officialdom of any role in the attacks, but chose not to do so with Pakistan.
I think we just caught Mr.
I think we just caught Mr. Kean in a BOLD FACED LIE.
As WELL as possibly confirming the alleged briberies.
While they didn't say
While they didn't say anything about the wire transfer in either the 'final' report of the staff monograph on terrorist financing that followed one month after the 'final' report, they did say on p. 172 of the 'final' report that ultimately, the origin of the funds for the attack is of little practical significance. Come on, Jon, quit wasting your breath. This isn't an important issue, your Commission told you so!
Speaking of what the
Speaking of what the Commission chose to talk about and what not to talk about, awhile back I recall someone questioning those taking the Commission to task for not talking about WTC7 given that the NIST was the 'operative entity' responsible for investigating that collapse, and the NIST did not submit its final report until after the 9/11 Commission. Yet the NIST final report on the collapse of WTC1 and WTC2 did not arrive until after the 9/11 Commission's final report either, did it not? And the 9/11 Commission chose to discuss the collapse of WTC1 and WTC2, did it not? (e.g. 'hollow steel shaft') This doesn't compute, does it?
Man that Alex Jones
Man that Alex Jones (Infowars, Prison Planet, Jones Report) is truly an amazing guy!!!!
my take on 911 is that the
my take on 911 is that the israeli mossad was the ones who set the explosives in the twin towers and destroyed building 7 to get rid of any evidence that they used it for thier base of opperations , and the bush gang was responsiblefor covering it all up, reason for it all to get us involved in iraq
the mossad team was flown
the mossad team was flown out back to israel at the same time the bin laden family was flown out , flight 93 was shot down by our jets and the movie thier releasing about it is complete bull crap,
http://www.nbc4.com/news/8390
http://www.nbc4.com/news/8390417/detail.html
http://www.nbc4.com/news/8390306/detail.html
I have found Barrie Zwicker
I have found Barrie Zwicker to have presented disinformation in his video The Great Conspiracy. It was his obtuse diversive nonsensical reaction when questioned about his blatant mistake that made it seem, to me, to be have been intentional. (Barrie states that Bush told us he saw the 1st WTC impact on an "ordinary TV", which is not true -- Bush never said "ordinary TV". This is an incredible mistake for a professional journalist to have made, yet BZ is not the only one who's fraudulently presented Bush's repeated incriminating self-implicating 9/11 witness statements...!)
Then at the end of Barrie's TGC video, he provides a list of cross-linked web sites of which he says that the MSM does not want people to be aware, yet that same group of web sites BZ promotes does not want people to be aware of fuller-truth web sites!
Such behavior matches what one would expect from a limited-hangout disinformation campaign, which is best hidden in plain sight not by infiltrating the leadership of the 911 truth movement, but by BEING the leadership of the 911 truth movement.
______________________________________
"...Barrie states that Bush
"...Barrie states that Bush told us he saw the 1st WTC impact on an 'ordinary TV', which is not true -- Bush never said 'ordinary TV'"....
Gee, maybe Bush will sue Barrie Zwicker for slander re: ordinary tv vs. unordinary tv???
"It was his [Bush's] obtuse diversive nonsensical reaction when questioned about his blatant mistake that made it seem, to me, to be have been intentional."
Blimp, who proved/settled that it was a "blatant mistake" in Bush claiming to have seen the 1st plane???
There is something not quite right with you, Blimp.
Blimp. I am so sick of you
Blimp. I am so sick of you at this point.
Jon, did you get my email?
Jon, did you get my email?
Yes. I sent you a PM on my
Yes. I sent you a PM on my site.
Jon, there is a cool remix
Jon, there is a cool remix of War by Edwin Starr on a Motown Remixed CD. Also Smiling Faces by Undisputed Truth.
That must either be some
That must either be some powerful disinformation (and/or some weak/malmotivated minds around here) that some self-proclaimed 911 truthers here can't recognize disinformation even when it is explained to them.
Barrie Zwicker, in his DVD, repeatedly falsely refers to Bush's statement as having referred to an "ordinary" and "normal" TV, when Bush never said anything of the kind!
Falsely declaring Bush's incriminating statements null and void, as practiced by Barrie Zwicker, Mike Rivero (wrh.com), and Jerrett Murphy (to name but 3) is a now-recognized disinformation campaign within the 9/11 truth movement.
In contrast, here is an honest, competent way of considering Bush's self-implicating statements. (The page still has a standing $500 reward offer to anyone who can substantiate what Barrie Zwicker, Mike Rivero, and Jarrett Murphy falsely state as fact: http://911blimp.net/$500reward.shtml -- 911blimp.net puts its money where its mouth is, based upon the facts; the truth-deniers stoop to emotional personal attacks!)
What should people think of anyone who calls names and claims to be "sick of" someone who points out disinfo within the 9TM?
______________________________________