Colorado Group Sues Local Paper for Refusal to Discuss 9/11 Cover Up

A group of 9/11 activists in Colorado have sued their local paper The Durango Herald for their refusal to cover the 9/11 cover up.

After a quick search I found the following article regarding this group. Apparently they collected 300 signatures, presented it to their local paper, and the paper still refuses to cover the issues at hand.

Woman takes Petition to the Local Newspaper asking them to Print the Truth about the 911 Cover Up

Late yesterday afternoon (3-20-06), Judith Pfeif and a gathering of concerned citizens approached the Publisher, Mr. Richard G. Ballantine, and the Editor, Mr. Bill Roberts of the local newspaper The Durango Herald with a Petition asking them to print a story about the 911 cover up exposing the 911 lie. This huge cover up and the lies about 911 are responsible for the better part of the chaos we see in our world today. All we are asking from the press is to print the truth.

The Woman Judith Pfeif, who is the organizer of a group called, "Caring for Our Community" along with those concerned others delivered to the Publisher and Editor of the Herald, a petition signed by over 300 other concerned citizens from the local area and town of Durango, CO. She had been collecting signatures for months prior to this presentation of the facts.

Interesting story to say the least, we report, you decide - post your thoughts in the comments.

Thanks to Jon Gold for the heads up!

Printing the 'truth.'

Printing the 'truth.' Covering the 'lies.' The truth is a hard thing to know. We don't know it yet. Printing 'the truth' means printing the facts as we know them now, and more importantly, the remaining questions that still exist.

See Sissela Bok, especially her book "Lying."

Four months to go til the

Four months to go til the big 5 year anneversary...I'm hoping more and more big names will come forward, more anti war activists will get on board, and the evidence can get out there to more people.

Anyone know of any big events coming up
besides a couple conferences and documentaries?

I've been to Durango. It's a

I've been to Durango. It's a college town in the midst of a seriously right-wing landscape. The editor and publisher probably would get shot if they reported 9/11 truth in that area. Don't get me wrong -- I think the law suit is a great idea -- it's just that we're talking serious red state pressure all around that town.

keep up the good work...I'm

keep up the good work...I'm getting ready to call Richard at home to tell him my thoughts...hmm what's that number again? [removed phone number]

[please don't post phone numbers here, i dont want the ramifications]Edited By Siteowner

It's heartening to know that

It's heartening to know that some good citizens in Colorado have seen fit to petition there local newspaper about the 911 truth. It's high time all of our countries corporate controlled newspapers start covering this despicable act of domestic terrorism.

"Freedom of the press" also

"Freedom of the press" also includes a publisher or editor deciding to print (or not print) whatever they wish. If they have to bow to pressure such as this, then any group could pressure them to print their "truth" as that group sees it. Let's stay away from such actions.

Yeah, i doubt they have any

Yeah, i doubt they have any legal grounds... this may be a good publicity stunt, though.

Consider the ramifications

Consider the ramifications of these two sentences, from the article -

The MOST POWERFUL EVIDENCE
of the 911 cover up given to the Editor and Publisher of the Durango Herald was in the five DVD 911-Videos she handed them. The names of the DVDs given to them for excellent source material to report from were:

911-In Plane Site,
Loose Change,
Confronting the Evidence/
Painful Deceptions
The Greatest Lie Ever Told

(the 9/11 truth movement
has been hijacked)

bb, speak for yourself. What

bb, speak for yourself. What you mean to say is that *you* don't know the truth. I've known the truth well before the 9/11 attacks. Said attacks didn't surprise me, as I was expecting them. The 9/11 attacks for me are just more of the same old, tired tricks that governments have been conducting against their subjects for thousands of years.

Commenting further on the above, there is an utterly substantial amount of exceedingly strong evidence which conclusively demonstrates the reality that the U.S. government staged the 9/11 attacks from beginning to end. It was 100% an inside job. No facet of the operation was left to supposed "terrorists" (i.e., not under the command of the U.S. government) to conduct, i.e., the "let it happen on purpose" scenario. The supposed "terrorists" that the U.S. government accuses had obvious protection from the highest levels of the U.S. government (this also goes for Osama bin Laden himself); indeed, many of the accused 9/11 "terrorists" had their legal residences on U.S. military bases. It's quite straightforward to demonstrate that the supposed "suicide hijackers" that the U.S. government has fingered are themselves agents of the U.S. government. The evidence of this is quite solid and overwhelming.

So knowing the truth about the 9/11 attacks is simply a matter of following the evidence. And in this case, we're drowning in a massive sea of hardcore evidence. Indeed, our problem isn't lack of exceedingly strong evidence, it's that there's so much said evidence that it's hard to work through it all; so also to keep up with it all, as more said evidence comes out as time goes on.

Concerning the matter of suing this paper, the Durango Herald, there is only one sense in which I could see supporting such an action. This sense in which I speak of is that the mainstream major media are thoroughly inflitrated by their respective governments, i.e., they are de facto nationalized, much like Pravda under the U.S.S.R.

If the Durango Herald were actually a private entity not under the control of the U.S. government, then suing it for not publishing something that one wants would be utterly wrong, even if the subject one wants it to publish were true and very important. For in that case they would have a right to do whatever thay wanted to do with their own property, so long as they respect everyone else's same-self right.

But since the mainstream major media are not in fact independent, but are in fact agents of their respective governments, I don't shed a tear over them getting sued for being the willingly controlled and payed-off toadies they are. At least not in principle, I don't.

Though, there is another aspect to this case, and just as important. This apsect is the notion that a company can be sued for not publishing something that some person or group wants them to publish. Governments would love to establish this precedent, for then it would give them another avenue in which to control desenting thoughts.

Even if it were made clear that the reason a publisher is being sued is because they are an agent of their respective government, and hence not genuinely a private entity, it would be very easy for governments to pervert such a precedent for their own gain. So in all, from a strategic point of view, such a lawsuit as this will probably have the potential to do more harm than good to the cause of truth.

A better strategy for us would be to shame those who don't speak up for the truth. This strategy requires no arms or might--let alone *government* arms and might (such as in a lawsuit as this). It simply requires us to point out to others who the willing, spineless toadies in the media are.

The "right wing" is going to

The "right wing" is going to be more receptive to investigating 9/11 than the "left." Quotes are because these terms, in the US, are less about philosophy than they are about ethnicity, where you live, race, etc. What percentage of right wingers are for getting rid of Social Security? And what percentage of left wingers would want their own taxes raised 100% to give "the poor" unlimited health insurance and the best possible education, etc. etc.

Whatever, the people who are "right wing" - just so long as they don't depend on the Republican Party for their livelihood - are a target audience for 9/11 information and they are already turning against Bush in the polls something fierce. Don't we all know self-identified right wingers who now hate Bush?

I agree with longknowledge.

I agree with longknowledge. Such tactics are seriously misguided and ill-informed. The 'truth' never needs force to be heard and if we respect freedom of the press, we should all be discouraging those behind the petition to back off.

"What you mean to say is

"What you mean to say is that *you* don't know the truth. I've known the truth well before the 9/11 attacks. Said attacks didn't surprise me, as I was expecting them."

That may be your own belief but if it were actually true, no one would be arguing about it. Let's stick to actual evidence.

Electing liberals & leftists

Electing liberals & leftists into Congress and the Whitehouse will be painful, for sure. They'll do their best to establish communism with 90% taxes etc., but it is a MUST.

All the republicans have gone along for years, never letting a word slip about 9/11. I put a question into Newt Gingrich's forum at newt.org (i recommend yall do too) about 9/11 and the WarOnTerror, and it was just ridiculed and suppressed. McCain ain't no better, he sure knows the whole truth about 9/11, but will remain "politically correct" until his deathbed by denying government involvement and to protect the US image.

"the enemy of my enemy is my friend"
(old arabic wisdom)

hahahaha, you people always

hahahaha, you people always bash liberals. you people kill me. you sound like Rush Limbaugh around here "damn leftist liberal bleeding heart commies".give me a fucking break. fuck republicans and all of the puppets that support them.fuck the dems too.again, i didnt know the liberal ideology was taken over by criminals in the form of neocons and PNAC. oh wait, they aren't liberals? jeez, i always forget around here. the last true liberal to be elected to the white house was JFK. he wanted to destroy the criminal CIA and stop the Vietnam war. but fuck liberals right? you guys would make Hannity proud.establish communism? you sound EXACTLY like George Will.

Yeah, like liberals are all

Yeah, like liberals are all about taxes and socialism. If that's true and you believe in extremes, then conservatism is about racism and fascism. I wonder, has anyone ever studied year over year, administration over administration, which has been better for the middle class. Really, think about it, do you pay more, the same, or less when a liberal or conservative is in power. My guess is the same.

exactly. though, im pretty

exactly. though, im pretty sure this is as close to fascism as this country has ever been, and last time i checked, the Bush administration wasnt a bastion of liberals.

not only have republicans

not only have republicans gone on for years ignoring 9/11, but they exploit the hell out of it.its shameless and disgusting and they do it daily. they also have driven up the deficit to insane levels.never has this country owed so much money we cant pay. the entire world hates us on now based on the republicans foriegn policy. science and medical research is shelved to appease the religious right.republicans are the main cheerleaders for domestic spying and other constitution shredding bullshit. but yeah, fuck liberals, they are the main problem right? right?!?!?!?!

Newt Gingrich is a steaming

Newt Gingrich is a steaming pile of shit that happens to know how to walk and talk.

Please stop posting useless profane posts like this, they serve no purpose.Edited By Siteowner

So if a paper gets sued for

So if a paper gets sued for not reporting something, do they report that they got sued for not reporting something?

Sort of like, if a tree falls in the woods ...

Chris I stole your homepage

Chris I stole your homepage idea. Hope you don't mind :)

For truthout, The people

For truthout,
The people that have done the homework have established that 9/11 was an inside job, top to bottom. Specifically, controlled demolition can't be explained any other way. (Of course that not's the only evidence)

Have you seen my pics of the North Tower exploding?

Gosh I miss posting here ;-) not on braodband all the time anymore...
Great to see all the well thought comments lately.
Hope to see everyone in Chicago!

"Newt Gingrich is a steaming

"Newt Gingrich is a steaming pile of shit that happens to know how to walk and talk."
"Please stop posting useless profane posts like this, they serve no purpose."
Edited By Siteowner

Yes, Chris. While your political posts are quite true, they are better for HuffPo & Smirking Chimp. Let's stick more to 9/11 & tone it down a bit, my excitable friend.

Only good as a publicity

Only good as a publicity stunt - maybe... but still a fantastic idea.

What if communities all across the country filed suit... against newspapers and network TV? A waste of time, maybe. But it would also send a shot across the bough. The people are uniting... and they're pissed off.

TLP--You are on the right

TLP--You are on the right track!

Nice pics spork, defnitely a

Nice pics spork, defnitely a CD.

Shame about the "well poisoners", but great blog otherwise.

The terms "left" and "right"

The terms "left" and "right" in the political sense go back to 1789 France. When the French Estates-General met on May 6, 1789, the Third Estate commoners, who wanted less taxes and government control (i.e., "laissez-faire"), were seated on the left side of King Louis XVI, and the Second Estate nobles and First Estate clergy, who were the conservatives and wanted to maintain the government's power, sat on his right. (Prior to the May 1789 convention of the French Estates-General [the first meeting of which was on May 5, 1789], the last time the Estates-General had met was in 1614.)

Also, "liberal" originally meant what we would call today (at least in the U.S. and Canada) "libertarian," i.e., laissez-faire free market, less taxes, less regulation, and gun ownership by the common people. Thus, in the original sense of the words, someone who wanted no taxes, all drugs to be legal, a free market, and armament of the common people would be a left-wing liberal.

The term "liberal" as it is commonly used today is purely and simply a misnomer meaning the opposite of what it originally meant, as those commonly called "liberals" today are about giving government more power, not in stripping government of power. Those commonly called "liberals" today are in fact *right-wing conservatives* in the original sense of that political term. So also, socialism and communism are exceedingly *right-wing* and *conservative* political philosophies, as they put all power into the hands of government, rather than strip government of power.

Of course, this change in the meaning of liberalism (such that today it means the opposite of what it originally meant) was by no accident. Authentic liberalism represents the only genuine threat to statism (i.e., right-wing conservatism, in the original sense of the term), and due to liberalism's triumphs in gaining the intellectual high-ground during the 19th century, it was necessary for the ruling elite to subvert the liberal agenda if they were to survive. The ruling elite did this by sabotaging the very meaning of the terms "liberalism" and "left-wing"--such that these terms now popularly mean the opposite of what they once did--via bankrolling and promoting self-termed "liberal" court intellectuals who in fact promote the right-wing, conservative agenda, i.e., statism, i.e., collectivism. Thus, in doing this, the ruling elite succeeded in changing the meaning of their oppositional philosophy to a philosophy that supports their empowerment! That is, the ruling elite created another branch of right-wing conservatism, nowadays called by the misnomer "liberalism," so also by the names of socialism and communism.

"Specifically, controlled

"Specifically, controlled demolition can't be explained any other way."

I haven't seen enough evidence that gives me full confidence in your statement. I still have too mnay unanswered questions.

I don't understand our

I don't understand our liberal politicians. I just don't know what I find hard to believe, our politicians are blissfully ignorant, or they are part of the cover-up. I have been hassling Lynne Woolsey sending her e-mails, faxes, calling her D.C. and Santa Rosa office asking WHY DID WTC 7 COLLAPSE? and she refuses to answer me. She sends me e-mails saying thanks for supporting impeachment of Bush. I just honestly don't understand what is going on with her.

-to: I haven't seen enough

-to:

I haven't seen enough evidence that gives me full confidence in your statement. I still have too [many] unanswered questions.

That's pretty ambiguous, what kind of questions do you have?

Chris I stole your homepage

Chris I stole your homepage idea. Hope you don't mind
Monsieur le Prof | Homepage | 05.10.06 - 11:38 am | #
not at all.

Yes, Chris. While your political posts are quite true, they are better for HuffPo & Smirking Chimp. Let's stick more to 9/11 & tone it down a bit, my excitable friend.
Anonymous | 05.10.06 - 12:07 pm | #
i agree, ive never posted anything political here until about a month ago when a few posters here decided to blame liberals for the 9/11 cover-up.the only time i post something political is in response to somebody else.

Newt Gingrich is a steaming pile of shit that happens to know how to walk and talk.

Please stop posting useless profane posts like this, they serve no purpose.

Edited By Siteowner
Chris | Homepage | 05.10.06 - 10:16 am | #
again, somebody above me brought up Newt Gingrich and how he was ignoring 9/11 truth, and i simply pointed out what i think of Newt.i didnt bring him up.

Excellent - more communities

Excellent - more communities should demand that the MOUNTAIN of 911 evidence be published in their local papers - all media channels should be exposed as only puppets of their parent owners, the media moguls who intend to keep the truth hidden (about 911) from the American public.

# # #

I have just gotten dumped

I have just gotten dumped from my local paper The Rim Valley Gazette for my 9/11 story, here's the response I got:
Meria

I am afraid we are going to have to stop running your column. The investors have been critical of it since the start, and the 911 thing really sent them over the top. I asked 10 people I respected to read it, including some investors, and 8 said don't run it. I am sorry. I am a liberal and can't stand what the government is doing but I cannot let this paper die. The town needs it.

Thanks for everything.

Jim
This from a so called "Liberal" paper - Meria
www.Meria.net