Some New Articles and a FOIA request.

Two articles poke Oliver Stone for not making a new JFK;

The Village Voice: "Fakes on a Plane"

LA Times: "An indictment of Mr. Conspiracy"

FOX News watchdog site, (Their motto: "We watch FOX so you don't have to."), has posted two pieces critical of the way that FOX has chosen to frame 9/11 skepticism. The first is about Fetzer's appearance on "Heartland" (why don't they just call it "Homeland" and get it over with);

Aug 6: Watching Heartland can be a wild ride that’s full of surprises. Just when you think that reason is prevailing, you are suddenly thrust back onto a roller coaster of intense insanity. Last night’s show was a classic example of a Heartland adrenalin surge ... Kasich lead off with a hardball (whoops, wrong show!) question about Fetzer having said that Bush’s brother Marvin and cousin Wirt D. Walker III placed bombs at the Trade Center. Kasich added “are you serious?” Fetzer calmly replied to Kasich that “you didn’t get it straight” and explained how he felt that it wasn’t possible for the buildings, which were built to withstand an airliner impact, to collapse in the way that they did. Kasich, already highly agitated, interrupted Dr. Fetzer’s explanation of the mechanics of the explosions by stating that “we don’t have all night, you said that a bomb was placed by Bush’s brother and cousin.” (Comment: no he didn’t, weren’t you listening, John?) ... Fetzer tried one more time to explain that the buildings came down from the top, in free fall, and that is a characteristic of explosives. He then said that Marvin Bush and Walker III were involved with a security company (Comment: now defunct) that was connected to the Trade Towers. Fetzer said that his research debunked the Popular Mechanics article that asserted that the jet fuel got into the elevator shafts and caused the explosions. Kasich kept interrupting and shouting, “You are not arguing that the bombs were placed by Bush and his cousin?”

Aug 7: Ever since Scripps Howard released poll findings last week that 36% of Americans believe it is at least somewhat likely that the federal government was involved in or took no action to prevent the attacks of September 11th, FOX news talking heads have been ridiculing and dismissing the possibility. On the other hand, they have yet to cause such a kerfuffle over the equally remarkable poll finding that the number of Americans who believe WMDs were found in Iraq has risen to 50%. We don't need to ask why the double standard ... The torch was passed to Bill O'Reilly, who tonight 8/7/06 on The Factor had James B. Meig, Editor-in-chief of Popular Mechanics, as his lone guest on the topic. Mr Meig's sole qualification to comment on the topic appears to be his position at the magazine which published an article in March 2005 challenging the emerging conspiracy theories, which article has now been greatly expanded into a book, Debunking 9/11 Myths. (The title appears to be a direct reply to an earlier book, Debunking 9/11, which documents its findings of government involvement.) It was clearly mentioned that this book is based on science, something not always of importance to FOX viewers ... O'Reilly invited Meig to go over each "myth" one by one. Meig obliged and spoke authoritatively on matters of physics and engineering, claiming the engineering community is unanimous in its conclusions. He also put forth the explanation that the wings of the plane that hit the Pentagon "flowed into the structure more like a liquid than a solid." O'Reilly summed up that scientists were not stunned by anything; A led to B led to C, there was nothing miraculous. O'Reilly again displayed a recurring arrogance, that if he doesn't know something (or in this case see something) than it didn't happen. This time he said that he was in NY, watching it on television, and he didn't see any missile - how does anyone believe this stuff?

This person is trying to purchase the NIST WTC computer model, via a FOIA request.

Thanks for the submissions and for posting the articles in the comments thread.

It's Fox new's credibility

It's Fox new's credibility that convinces democratic blog visitors that 9/11 wasn't an inside job.
The fact that Fox news blasts the 9/11 truth crowd should be a red flag to all of the people who visit those blogs.
I can't get over the gullibility of those people. They even think elections matter. Was it Thompson who said "If voting made a difference it would have been outlawed a long time ago?"

OK, here's an idea. Fox's

OK, here's an idea. Fox's motto is "we report, you decide".

So, a video could be made enititled "911 - we report, you decide. What Fox never told you".

The video would cover the hatchet job that Fox has done wrt 911 Truthers. OF COURSE, it would start out with Professor Fetzer of st911 whupping Oliver North on the Hannity and Colmes show.

It would then cover "the usual" 911 stuff, though it would have to recognize that Fox did cover the "dancing Israelis" (IIRC), while other networks didnt'.

It should then go on to cover the the awful truth of the rest of American mainstream media (e.g., the analysis done of the almost total war mongering bias of the talking heads on "liberal" CNN prior to Gulf War 1 - reported on Democracy Now! - and also various stunners in "Into the Buzzsaw"), and finally the "left gatekeeper" phenomena.

The perfect companion CD to such a gift is the documentary "OutFoxed".

In my view, the corruption of the news outlets is a bigger problem than 911, because it ALLOWS not only the perpetuation of the 911 Fairy Tales, but also does the same wrt other US Government false flag terrorism and assassinations, and also "manufactures consent" for its perpetual war making.

My favorite solution:

I have posted a proposal on the Randi Rhodes show forum for replacing our current media with a new, sustainable media that facilitates the selection of "filtering agents". You can think of these as honest gatekeepers that YOU trust - and that keep out trivial information, rather than very important information that groups with economic and other hidden agendas prefer to hide from you.

Broadband access is now up to 42% in the US, so it is quite possible to target TELEVISION, which is how about 48% of Americans get 30+ minutes of news per day (as opposed to about 9% over the internet). See

The thread is entitled: "Putting the NY Times Out of Business"
The thread is subtitled: "Proposal to replace ALL corrupt media"



CIA Instructions to Media

CIA Instructions to Media Assets
This document caused quite a stir when it was discovered in 1977. Dated 4/1/67, and marked "DESTROY WHEN NO LONGER NEEDED", this document is a stunning testimony to how concerned the CIA was over investigations into the Kennedy assassination. Emphasis has been added to facilitate scanning.

CIA Document #1035-960, marked "PSYCH" for presumably Psychological Warfare Operations, in the division "CS", the Clandestine Services, sometimes known as the "dirty tricks" department.

what I would like to see

what I would like to see done.... when a truther is a guest on a fox 'news' program and the host is saying how much of a joke the controlled demolition theory is, the guest show fox's own coverage from 9-11 on a monitor behind them where they are actually talking about all the explosions.

or maybe make a video

or maybe make a video interweaving hannity, oreilly and whomever else saying demolition is crazy with the news footage from 9-11, could make it look pretty orwellian.

Why not make a cartoon like

Why not make a cartoon like this:

First picture:
a 1960ies news reporter says "i don't believe these outrageous conspiracy theories." with the JFK 'magic bullet' in the background (

Second picture:
a "Time warp": 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

Third picture:
a modern day news reporter says "i don't believe these outrageous conspiracy theories." with the falling WTC towers in the background (or WTC7 etc.)

Didn't Jimmy Walter promise

Didn't Jimmy Walter promise to support FOIA requests regarding 911 at least on Jones last panel in LA?

This guy with the computer modelling request should be supported!

when that guy says things

when that guy says things like "flowed more like a liquid rather than a solid" that makes a pentagon no planer, but i know its a booby trap. but how can you, as a scientist, say anything remotely that stupid

The FOIA-info should be sent

The FOIA-info should be sent to the Scholars - maybe they can raise the money somehow.

New Book Challenges Media Over September 11th Coverage

Fox's motto is "we lie, so

Fox's motto is "we lie, so you can justify your hate".

..."We decide, you listen".

..."We decide, you listen".

[limited hangout alert] How

[limited hangout alert]

How 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented

A new book explores the 'stupidity, hubris and dereliction of duty' behind the pre-9/11 intelligence failure.

By Rory O'Connor, AlterNet. Posted August 7, 2006

If engineers are unanimous,

If engineers are unanimous, then where can we find the official engineering reports... ones with all the technical details? We'll see if this engineer agrees.

"when that guy says things

"when that guy says things like "flowed more like a liquid rather than a solid" that makes a pentagon no planer, but i know its a booby trap. but how can you, as a scientist, say anything remotely that stupid"

shhh! American Idol's on!


That picture is so crappy,

That picture is so crappy, reprehensor dude take that shit down, it's hardly what I would call art, but still it's obviously intended to be like a s-hit piece in art form. Trying to paint 9/11 sceptics as "nutbag conspiracy theorists". People should even be subjected to looking at that garbage.

lol dumb spelling,

lol dumb spelling, *shouldnÂ’t even be subjected to looking at that garbage.*. To be honest I can't believe I actually invested energy in taking a look at it, that crap is so abrasive.

That picture is so crappy,

That picture is so crappy, reprehensor dude take that shit down, it's hardly what I would call art, but still it's obviously intended to be like a s-hit piece in art form. Trying to paint 9/11 sceptics as "nutbag conspiracy theorists". People should even be subjected to looking at that garbage.
Dem Bruce Lee Styles | Edit comment Delete comment | Email | Homepage | 08.08.06 - 10:28 am | #

Anybody else want me to take it down?

Dude please, it's so shitty

Dude please, it's so shitty lol! And it's an illustrated hit piece, you've gotta see that at least? What else is it?

Ok at least say underneath it something like "What smearing in art form looks like?", because that's essentially what it is.

On another note though,

On another note though, having graphics for some of the threads might be a great idea, have a look at Cloak & Swaggers wicked blog;

^ If he could do graphics for 911blogger as well that would be something amazing.

reprehensor dude don't get

reprehensor dude don't get me wrong, I'm not dissing you for putting it up or anything like that, and keep it up by all means if you want. IÂ’m guessing you just saw it was part of that article and grabbed it. But if you read the article to, that is also a hit piece, it makes out everyone essentially questioning 911 is a nutbag, and that evidence they point to is actually "evidence" is quotation marks. So that wack art work is something designed to lend itself to the pathetic line of argument in the article. So it doesnÂ’t deserve exposure in my opinion.

*"evidence" in quotation

*"evidence" in quotation marks*

"This time he said that he

"This time he said that he was in NY, watching it on television, and he didn't see any missile - how does anyone believe this stuff?"

A slight correction. O'Reilly said this about TWA 800 not 9/11.

No man is above

No man is above dissing.

That guy in the illustration could have been me in November, 2001. This is the website that got me questioning 9/11;

Everybody's gotta start somewhere.

I was inspired to go looking for stuff like that by President George Walker Bush;

“We must speak the truth about terror. Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the 11th; malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists, themselves, away from the guilty.”

Until November 10th, 2001, I was a suckah. I didn't know there were any "outrageous conspiracy theories concerning" 9/11.

President George Walker Bush brought light into my life. {{sob}}

I sent on the FOIA info to

I sent on the FOIA info to the Scholars to see if they can fund it.

If not, I might try to hit up some of you for support.

I have a very big problem

I have a very big problem with the Israeli-American Michael Chertoff because he was also the official who also "failed" to investigate 9-11 as Asst. Attorney General in charge of the Criminal Division of the Dept. of Justice on 9-11.

He was also the New Jersey attorney who guided the investigation and criminal trial of the Arabs involved in the first "terror" attack on the World Trade Center of 1993. This "false flag" operation was designed to form the impression in the minds of Americans that Arabs were targeting the WTC twin towers, so that when 9-11 happened it would be assumed by the world that Arabs were behind the terror attacks.

Asst. Attorney General Chertoff is the one who oversaw the non-investigation of what really happened on 9-11, who sent the 200 Israeli terror suspects home on "visa violations", who drew up the list of the 19 Arab suspects, and who single-handedly created the impression that Arabs had committed the 9-11 attacks while the real terror suspects, his Israeli comrades, went home to brag about their successful terror attacks in New York City!

Chertoff is the key Zionist mole in the U.S. governement that needs to be exposed and put in prison.

If anyone belongs in Guantanamo, chained to a floor, abused and beaten about for answers - it is Michael Chertoff, not some poor taxi drivers from Kabul!

well put Mike, couldnt have

well put Mike, couldnt have said it better myself.

Oh,I almost left out the

Oh,I almost left out the Popular Mechanics piece..Benjamin Chertoff.
PM's senior researcher, 26-year-old Benjamin Chertoff, authored a propagandistic cover story entitled "Debunking 9/11 Lies" which seeks to discredit all independent 9/11 research that challenges the official version of events. But who is Benjamin Chertoff, the "senior researcher" at Popular Mechanics who is behind the article?
He is none other than a cousin of Michael Chertoff, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.
Chertoff said he was the "senior researcher" of the piece. When asked if he was related to Michael Chertoff, he said, "I don't know."
Benjamin's mother in Pelham, New York, however, was more willing to talk. Asked if Benjamin was related to the Secretary of Homeland Security, Judy said, "Yes, of course, he is a cousin.”

Imagine how many people HAVE

Imagine how many people HAVE NOT seen

after downloading 70megs there is
a two-hour gratification waiting.

===== REMINDER ==========

Re: Loose Change 70meg version

I made a very small FULL SCREEN watchable LOOSE CHANGE 2E version (with engl subtitles!)

There are MANY people who have NOT seen it yet.. for lack of bandwidth...

Its small enough to put on your server.

REAL MEDIA 10 is a great format..
it even http streams !!