Balancing the "Alert"

An Astroturf email campaign is underway, calling on the provost of UW to sack Kevin Barrett.

If you have time, send Provost Patrick Farrell a note, letting him know that Barrett certainly has support, and you might want to mention the email campaign being conducted by, that is causing his email box to be filled with hateful spam.

We all need to stop over thinking

How about a million dollar grant for the University.

The Kevin Barrett Scholarship?

Stop defending Kevin and start honoring him for exposing the truth.

I know for a fact that there are 100,000 of us who could push 10 dollar units towards this.

Pragmatic is the word.

information must triumph

donations ain't a bad idea, but let's face it, we'll never be able to outrun the neocons when it comes to cash: they're sucking $500bln out of the taxpayers every year just for the military, that includes psyops, blackops, Rumsfeld-ops etc., then their Big Oil friends and weapons industry - 9/11 just can't beat that

The "sleeping giant", the American people, must be awoken and choose to rise up and make their forefathers proud, or live in shame forever.

Show "The Price of Truth" by Amanda Reconwith



Please refrain from name-calling.


tell that to Shalom who

tell that to Shalom who calls me a Nazi every time i so much as mention Israel. he seems to get a pass from you guys. this double standard stuff is too much.


I will.



we don't know

It's all possible, even no-plane. But it's just not good in the name of 9/11 truth, (not 9/11 guessing), to say it "was" a nuke bomb. To say it was surely a "controlled demo", but we don't know how exactly, don't know why/how it was pulverised, that's what we should be hammering out.
Tell the H-bomb to any critical analyst and he will justifiably ask where's the radiation? Just like we are asking where did the molten metal and other residue come from?

9/11 truth has many drivers, some want wars to end, some want civil liberties restored, some want the terror industry to die, and SOME, some also just want the truth of what happened, who did it and how did they do it - to say to them it was a nuke, without any evidence, and to say there was no plane without any witness that saw no-plane, is pure crap.


If nucs were used, then how them the buildings didn't go up in a flash?
Are you proposing that one can control rate and direction of a nuclear
reaction? Perhaps a nuclear reaction without any radiation (and yes
I've see the low-radiation nuc papers).


The new technology being developed right near me in Los Alamos is HIGHLY nuanced and you might even get to see some in action in Iran in a couple weeks.

Hate Mail page

Kevin should start a page with all the hate mail he has and will receive. I'm sure if he picked through for 20 of the most absurd messages, it could be one of the most hilarious 9/11 Truth- related pages ever... It's a cheap shot to pull on your opponents, but all- too necessary in this case. Post it here instead of so there's no need to censor vulgarity (right DZ?)...

I just e-mailed Here is a copy...........I think Kevin Barrett is doing a fine job. He is a true patriot. For anyone who takes the time to research 9/11 it is obvious that the attacks were government sponsored. The "Official 9/11Report" is comic book stuff. Even Ian Fleming would have trouble with it. As far as comparing Bush with Hitler there is a similarity. If you research the Bush family you will find his grandfather, Prescott Bush helped finance Hitler's war machine.............

A letter to Provost Patrick Farrell

I just wrote my letter of support for Kevin Barrett to Provost Patrick Farrell, I also told him to check out the website for an idea of their agenda. Their opening paragraph in the "About Us" section reads as follows:

In February of 2003, the socialist wannabe's at led a coalition of 32 radical left-wing organizations -- including Feminist Majority, Greenpeace, National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, National Organization for Women (NOW), and Jesse Jackson's Rainbow/Push Coalition -- in what they called the "Virtual March on Washington". Their agenda: to oppose President Bush, the liberation of Iraq, and the War on Terror. Their efforts were widely reported to be demoralizing to our troops in the field."


Socialist wannabe's???

"A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves" – Edward R. Murrow

Letter to WU

Dear Mr. Farrell,
It pains me to see how a University would try and limit the valid discussion of our government's policies and actions. Perhaps the US educational system is taking a page from Turkey in its attempts to silence the genocide of Armenians at the end of WWII. The Incontinent Truth is not just limited to Global Warming, but to the events leading up to 9/11.

By attacking the views of Mr. Barrett, you are trudging on the very sacrade ground of the 1st Amendment. Truly I tell you that when decent is silenced - even if it is wrong - we all suffer. The US is strong enough to hear all voices - if it weren't we would have outlawed the KKK long ago.

The topic of Flase-Flag Operations by the US and other governments, while controversial, is certainly not without precedent. Certainly the latest revelations about the USS Liberty attack in 1967, the declassified Northwood’s Document regarding False Flag operations to promote a war with Cuba, and the recent declassification of documents showing that the Gulf of Tonkin incident that lead the US into the Vietnam War serve as precedents for the idea that 9/11 being greatly facilitated by elements in the Bush Administration.

I am an independent, I voted for Reagan and Bush #1, did not vote for Clinton, and yet did vote for Kerry. I have never had any strong party affiliation, and so my thoughts are not patrician but built up from extensive research, education and my upbringing by a 3-time purple heart Marine who served in the Korean Conflict.

I feel very strongly that there is enough SOLID evidence to point to our government’s less then tacit involvement in assisting in 9/11 by doing nearly everything in its power to thwart it's prevention.

Why do I feel this why, you may ask? I assure you it has nothing to do with the controlled demolition, no-plane or missile theories, but on SOLID evidence that leads one to the conclusion that elements in the Bush administration/Military knew more then what they are saying - and a lot more.

Some simple examples:

1) The recent revelations about the Tenant / Rice meeting (despite her shameful denials) as documented in Bob Woodward's new book, show that Rice by her deliberate inaction did nothing to stop 9/11. This revelation only adds to the case that the inter sanctum of the Admin knowing did nothing.

2) The fact that it has been shown that Bush used 9/11 as a pre-text to war in Iraq when we know from the Downing Street Memos and many other facts that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and did not have WMD (yes the CIA knew that BEFORE the war we now know).

3) The fact that the Bush Admin did nothing substantial despite dozens (and that no exaggeration) of warning of an impending attack INSIDE the US from the CIA, the NSA, and foreign governments such as the UK, Israel, Egypt, Italy and Russia.

4) The fact that despite warning of hijackings in the US in response to the August 6th, PDA, that US commercial flights were not hardened - making 9/11 possible. Even if on one envisioned "using planes as missiles" (which is a joke because they had specifically defended against such as possibility at the G8 summit - specifically from Al-Quada!), surely the fact that a multiple hijacking threat was imminent the commercial aircraft should have been made more secure - no action was taken. In fact, the only action taken by the Bush Admin with regards to Airline security was to remove the ability of pilots to carry guns! - making them less secure!

5) The fact that time and time again attempts by low level CIA and FBI agents were thwarted in their investigations at the highest levels of their agencies. This was brought out in detail at the Zacarias Moussaoui trial. Just one example where the lead FBI agents repeated request for a FISA warrant was refused - a warrant that may have prevented 9/11 if executed because it has been shown that Moussaoui's computer had relevant information that would have lead to 9/11 hijackers. There are hundreds of similar incidents that had nothing to do with "THE WALL". This was proven in the 9/11 Report.

6) The fact that the Bush admin fought the investigation of 9/11 tooth and nail. It NEVER would have happened had it not been for the Jersey Girls. AND they didn't even have the decency (Bush / Cheney) to testify under oath, or with a transcriber, or anything. And the idea that they were allowed to discuss 9/11 together to the Commission is ludicrous. Review Bush's remarks after the meeting - Gee it was nice to talk about it, I'm glad I did it. How embarrassing for our country - I'm glad he found the time in his busy schedule!

7) The fact that Cheney is lying about the timeline as to when he got to the White House bunker. He says he didn't get there until after the plane hit the pentagon. But direct, under oath, testimony from Norman Mineta proves that he was in the bunker at 9:30 and that they were monitoring the plane that hit the Pentagon. Mineta provides testimony as he watches first hand Cheney being update that the plane is 50 miles out, 40 miles out, 30 miles out, 20 miles out, 10 miles out. At 10 miles Cheney is asked in the "Orders still stand". What Order is that? Shot down or NOT to Shot Down? This FACT was purposely left out of the 9/11 report. All we are left with is the laughable scene of Cheney being whisked out of this office by SS - being dragged out underneath his arms! Not likely that Cheney would ever let this happen.

8) The fact that EVERY person I have ever queried about 9/11 remembers EXACTLY where they were and what they were doing on that morning. BUT not the president. On two occasions in public and on the record, Bush talks about how he saw the FIRST PLANE hit the building and how he thought that it was a terrible accident. How is it possible for him to have such a ridiculous memory - he didn't even see the SECOND PLANE, much less the first plane hit anything that morning (or maybe he did on closed circuit TV in his limo which is were he was when the first plane hit the building).

9) And what about his actions during that morning? Bush states publicly that after the first attack they implemented the US defense plan - OH REALLY? Everyone else was under the impression that it was an accident - so why was the defense plan activated? And why did he hang out for 10 minutes reading a book to the kids after he was told that the country is under attack? Why did the SS not whisk him away as the supposedly did with Cheney. Not to scare the kids? What a joke because when he did hold his press conference afterwards (at the exact predetermined time), he wasn't worried about scaring the kids them as they lined up behind him and he went on about American being under attack! What a joke. Anyone that doesn't question this line of action is simply lazy and apathetic.

I could go on forever, never talking about strange conspiracy plots involving extra bombs or hologram plans. The fact of the matter is that there is enough evidence to show that both before, during and after the events of 9/11 the Bush cabal's actions are not consistent with a group that had nothing to do with, or nothing to gain from the 9/11 attacks taking place.

In this light, I support Kevin Barett's right to talk about alternative theories regarding 9/11. He has every right to compare Bush and his cabal to Hitler. Despite what people’s emotions are with regards to Hitler – he is not Satan – but an evil human that used deceptive techniques to lead his country into darkness. To not talk about Hitler and his methods as comparative analogies to current (and real) events risks allowing history to repeat itself. Regardless of whether Barett’s theories are correct or not - they are an expression of what makes America great and what ensures our freedoms when evil does come again.



Last time I cheked

Last time I cheked, spammed mail is a criminal offense as a federal and states statutory law.. Bring charges against the spammer in a criminal and civil court. The civil court is to get money out of the bastards.

Last time I che(c)ked

writing to anyone, elected official, private honcho, or whomever, with a sincere expression of one's view, no matter what the opinion, no matter what the reason or means of communication, or anything, is freedom of speech, not SPAM.

I used RightMarch's EMail tool

to send a brief letter of support. Nice of them to leave the subject and body blank!

Hi angry Chris, how arya.

"Angry Chris", huh?

One would think you're trying to provoke the man. A bit heady after using RightMarch to be a bad boy, are yeh?

Oh lookee! "Trollosaurus"! That's sooooooooo cute!

Snark for snark, mate.

where does it say Chris is a man?

No provocation needed, on this blog Chris is an angry name caller whose posts almost always lack any substance (don't take my word for it, see for yourself), gee kinda like yours! But I'm sure Chris is just a lovely pleasant person to be around in real life.

Oh lookee! A Colonel named Jenny! That's sooooooooo cute!

bye bye, Col. Jenny Snarks.

poor guy. its nice to see

poor guy. its nice to see someone ive never met in my life(on or offline) sems to know who i am and feels the need to say my name without provocation. i must be pretty goddamn important. need a friend trollosaurus? obviously you do. or maybe a hobby, or a job perhaps. look elsewhere.


I mean, come on folks, this is an intelligent site, let's stick with good ideas.

Pot and kettle

" angry name caller whose posts almost always lack any substance."

Another one from the pot and kettle club.

But seriously, mate, no need to be defensive. I DO like your name. It shows imagination. Something most trolls lack. So, good on you for that. And, you're right: Chris may not be male. My bad.

But you DID start the snark, sunshine.


your AIPAC too huh? cute

your AIPAC too huh? cute name.