The Time For Debate Is Over

Some of you may or may not have noticed, but I've been pushing activism a lot lately. Forming a local 9/11 group, distributing 9/11 flyers in your neighborhood, contacting your local representatives, and of course, your local media.

It has been more than five years since the day of 9/11. So much information has come out that proves beyond the shadow of doubt, we need a new investigation. Period. The end. That should be our focus, and our goal. Representatives of a good portion of family members called for a new investigation, and we should be doing everything in our power to help them get one. I fear that if the 9/11 Truth Movement continues to spend the majority of its' time debating who, what, when, why, and where, then I feel this movement will eventually become exactly what the New York Times described us as, "Conspiracy Buffs".

Spending your time on the internet, posting 9/11 Truth, is a form of activism. Take it from someone who knows, it is the most powerful tool we have for getting information out there.

That being said, how do we reach those individuals who don't spend their time on the computer?

By participating in the previously mentioned forms of activism.

If you think you're not the right person to take part in said activism, think again. You will often hear me say that I am a regular "joe schmoe." Well guess what? I am. Never in my life, prior to 9/11, did I care about the politics of this country. Never have I partcipated in a 9/11 People's Commission. Never have I participated in a D.C. Emergency Truth Convergence. Never have I helped people manage a booth at an anti-war rally. Never have I confronted a person like Representative Curt Weldon. Never have I gotten a local newspaper to cover a cause twice in one week. Never have I been apart of a Steering Committee for a leading organization. Never have I spoken at a workshop during a conference. Never have I gone door to door trying to educate people about something important. Never have I marched in silence to honor the fallen. Never have I had a hand in the making of an important documentary. Never have I written articles, never have I maintained a news website, never... never... never...

My point is, you never know what you can do until you try. The time for debate is over. It is time to take it to the next level.

Please do what you can.

We need to clarify what, when and where FIRST

Then investigate who and why


We need to get off our asses and do something about it. They lied to us. 1000x over. There's nothing to debate. We need a new investigation.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

We need a legal strategy

Jon, you are right, but I think WisdumbWatch has a point: 9/11 Truth lacks a coherent statement of beliefs. I realize many Truthers find this a good thing, because it embodies free speech and truly democratic politics. But it also means that the media can oppose whatever version of 9/11 Truth they want to, often choosing the obviously dubious.

Ruppert's version does not address physical evidence, and many libertarians object to Peak Oil as a motive. Tarpley's version is too aggressively MIHOP for mainstream America, and his connection to Lyndon LaRouche makes him an easy target for personal attacks. Griffin's version is still the most popular moderate expression of 9/11 Truth, but even he treads into a wedge issue like the Pentagon (the first thing every corporate anchor asks Dylan Avery, "Then where are the passengers?" Credibility lost, in the eyes of mainstream America). And Griffin uses questionable personalities such as Eric Hufschmid as primary sources at length.

And Loose Change, the most popular Truther film, is a seriously compromised document of 9/11 Truth. It is an excellent film, but has far too many errors and instances of cherrypicking evidence. At its core, LC is right; but its presentation needs to be tighter. I know I will get shouted down for that comment, but I think it's accurate. Maybe Griffin's involvement will correct some of these problems for the final cut? I hope it does.

I think your movie, Jon, Press for Truth, is probably the most accessible to moderates, but of course the hardliners in the movement cry foul at the first sign of LIHOP. Paul Thompson has been one of the best proponents for 9/11 Truth, but moderate voices are rarely heard in a shouting match such as this one. And anytime one of us criticizes one of the louder voices, such as Alex Jones, we are certain to be shouted down.

This is a factious movement, and that probably won't change. In the meantime, having No Planers talking to people at Ground Zero every weekend does irreparable damage to 9/11 Truth.

9/11 Truth needs a legal framework to proceed. It cannot achieve what it needs to achieve in the time frame it needs to achieve it with an Internet-based movement of disparate voices. 9/11 Truth needs something like what Robert Kennedy did with the e-voting issue. In two years, the opportunity for 9/11 Truth will have passed. This legal strategy needs to happen now.

Don't we have lawyers available...

And willing to write up a statement?

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Watergate is the precedent

I'm not sure. I know other legal challenges to certain aspects of the 9/11 story have failed (re: Saudi financing, for example). And of course the government will probably respond with "state secrets" to every piece of evidence that would really be valuable to us. Like, if Sibel Edmonds ever gets ungagged, I'm sure there will be an outcry of horror at what she knows; but that won't happen for decades, if at all.

So what is the one thing that you think a lawyer could take to a judge and say, "See, the government did something illegal on 9/11"?

I'm not a lawyer, but I'm surprised that the removal and destruction of evidence was never challenged. That seems to be something even OCTs see as dubious. I know that sounds like a weak entry point, but I think something along those lines sounds more reasonable than simply saying, "Let's try the government for treason! Y'know, on all counts of everything!"

Personally, I think Watergate should be our model. There must be a money trail somewhere that leads to 9/11. Guns, oil, drugs. The Dems seem to be interested in Haliburton's war contracts, but that won't get close to 9/11.

I believe...

"We're asking for a new investigation into the events of September 11th, and this time, a truly bipartisan, global, with families invested from the beginning, middle, and throughout the end."

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

How about...

Obstruction of justice? How many times did this Administration block attempts to investigate 9/11, and make it difficult for the Commission to do its' job? Not that they would have, but you see what I'm saying...

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."


And I don't mean to correct DMO... but I think it should be a non-partisan investigation.

I don't think anyone under their respective party should be there as a representative of their party.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Contact Henry Waxman

It's difficult to imagine what a truly independent investigation would look like, or who among the current political operatives would want it. The main reason the Dems don't pursue really significant forms of corruption is because they themselves undoubtedly have skeletons in the closet. Personally, I believe the Dems made a deal with Bush: flip the Diebold machines slightly in our favor, and we won't impeach you.

In terms of partisan representatives, consider the MSM talk about Henry Waxman:

"His targets have ranged from why the Taekwondo Union was allowing 12- and 13-year-olds to kick opponents in the head, to Medicare drug costs and baseball steroid use, to abuse of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib and government contracts given to Vice President Dick Cheney's former company, Halliburton."

The problem is, of course, talk like this:

""We want to return to civility and bipartisanship," Waxman said. "Legislation ought to be based on evidence, not ideology.""

Anyway, I think he's our best chance in government. Here's his contact info:

In Washington, D.C.
2204 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-3976 (phone)
(202) 225-4099 (fax)

In Los Angeles
8436 West Third Street, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90048
(323) 651-1040 (phone)
(818) 878-7400 (phone)
(310) 652-3095 (phone)
(323) 655-0502 (fax)

Ask his office if what happened at Ground Zero was "obstruction of justice."


What this post was about. I know that Barrie Zwicker, Ian Woods, and someone else wrote a letter to Rep. Waxman.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Sorry. Must have missed that

Sorry. Must have missed that one. That is indeed the idea.

Robert Kennedy and Diebold, NORAD and 9/11

The model for prosecution I imagine resembles what Robert Kennedy is doing against Diebold:

"On July 13, the Pensacola, Fla.-based law firm of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. filed a “qui tam” lawsuit in U.S. District Court, alleging that Diebold and other electronic voting machine (EVM) companies fraudulently represented to state election boards and the federal government that their products were “unhackable.”

Kennedy claims to have witnesses “centrally located, deep within the corporations,” who will confirm that company officials withheld their knowledge of problems with accuracy, reliability and security of EVMs in order to procure government contracts. Since going into service, many of these machines have been linked to allegations of election fraud."

At the very least, his lawsuit accomplishes two things: (1) it warns would-be election criminals that someone is watching; (2) it attacks Diebold directly, which is at least a symbolic victory.

What are the 9/11 parallels? I'm not sure, exactly. If pre-war intelligence and impeachment are off the table, as the Dems say, then the thread we need is less visible but potentially as dangerous.

I think the fact that NORAD lied to the Commission should be taken up by the DoJ. I mean, even Kean and Hamilton admit that much. I realize NORAD wasn't under oath, but surely telling publicly acknowledged lies about 9/11 must mean something?

I just talked to Phil Berg...

Jon Gold: In regards to "Obstruction Of Justice"... why can't that be applied to the Administration in regards to 9/11?

In other words... why can't we go after them with that?

Phil Berg: good thought

Phil Berg: I'll check it out

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."


Sounds about right.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

What about going at this through the First Responder's illness?

Kevin Barrett is talking about the illness and cause of it right now on his RBN radio show....couldn't a lawsuit over that be a foothold for the rest of 9/11 Truth?

There is so much evidence for government malfeasance with regard to sending the FRs back in to Ground Zero that it seems impossible to keep that out of the courts, even for these fascists. It's a small step after that to 9/11 Truth being revealed, IMO. ("How did that microscopic dust form anyway? Gravity?" paraphrase Col. Sparks: "not bloody likely".....)

His show just started, but will be archived here:


Certainly possible. I'm not a lawyer. I don't know what our best case is.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Among the 70,000 victims....

...there must be many who have caring, outraged relatives who are lawyers and would be interested in filing a class action suit....

I highly urge everyone to listen to Barrett's show with Les Jameson, who, I didn't realize, has done so much work supporting the First Responders...a lawyer from Missouri just called in suggesting a class action suit in an interesting way...

Les revealed something that just infuriates me...that the FRs believe that the criminals behind 9/11 are just trying stall tactics in an effort to wait them out; that is, hoping everyone dies off before they have to both pay everyone off and also to avoid FRs testifying in court about molten metal, etc....that the 9/11 Criminals want to avoid a court case that could unravel everything, at all costs....

Do you have a link?

And Les is my friend.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."


I posted the archive site above as get it all when they put it there...


I'm assuming it's today's show?

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."



Yes, it's live...

...about 30 minutes left....

The Missouri Lawyer's idea was....

....I believe, to concentrate the suit on the controlled demolition of Building 7....we have Silverstein admitting it...but, they obviously didn't have permits, etc. to do, laws must've been can't "pull" a building without having gone through the legal machinations to do so, right? And, he would be responsible for health hazards resulting from that illegal controlled demolition also, right?

There was much more to what he had to say, but it went by pretty fast and I missed most of it....I will re-listen....

Is the Missouri lawyer's statement

available online? Thanks.

There's certainly a major

There's certainly a major crime there, but I don't think it leads to any bigger lies or injustices. They could crucify Whitman, and leave it at that.

However, is there any way to get a group of firefighters, particularly the dying ones, to demand investigation of the secondary explosions they witnessed in the towers? I realize the chances are extremely slim, but surely some of the firefighters who were condemned to death by the EPA, and earlier by whomever planted the explosives, would find it worthwhile to make some noise before they die? Payback and justice?

FR illness might be a smoking gun.

I actually don't believe in magical smoking guns, but FR illness leads directly to the fact of ultra-fine pulverization. I caught something on the MSM last week that went into the size of the particles and specifically the fact that so much concrete was pulverized into such small particles (and affected the pH of the dust in general.) I was surprised at the level of detail it discussed in this regard because many, many people are eventually going to look at the dust and ask themselves, would a gravity-driven collapse do this? Or would it take some kind of explosive event?

It's not just FR...

It's also the people who lived in the vicinity.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Aren't there lawsuits already filed?

I thought a class action had already been filed. No?

A lawsuit like this would be about getting compensation for the plaintiffs. Good information might emerge from the lawsuit, but It seems like 9/11 as an inside job would make it harder to win, so I can't see this as a strategy. The issue is disregarding or lying about the risks of the air and sending people in. Not how the air got that way. For purposes of such a lawsuit, micro fine particles would be a reason not to send people in, not evidence of controlled demolition. Any lawyer who went in with the purpose of using the lawsuit to reveal "9/11 truth" would be acting unethically.

I could be wrong about 9/11 truth being a strategy in such a lawsuit, but the point is that 9/11 truth would only be proper as a means to the end of compensation for the harm done to the plaintiffs.

Yes, while continuing the "Information" phase...

....through individual efforts, such as posting on the Internet and passing out DVDs, that have been very successful...we need to move to the next stage of meeting and organizing groups in each city and town...then connecting those groups...after that happens, we just might be a political force to be reckoned with....

The Internet and Radio "communities" will always be very important, but local people need to establish a regular, tangible, physical place to meet and plan group action. These "tangible" communities must be developed as well as the Internet and Radio ones for us to go to the next level.

Regular group activism event ideas are numerous....for example, Jon, like John Conner, went out and filmed a day of distributing DVDs....we could all do that, post it on Blogger and whatever local website each group creates. This activism will all feed on itself and grow dramatically as groups are inspired by these examples and attempt to imitate and out-do them.

With the Police State being imposed at an ever-increasing rate through recent mechanisms like the Military Commisions Act or the Warner Bill....time is of the essence, folks.....

Everytime I go out...

This activism will all feed on itself and grow dramatically as groups are inspired by these examples and attempt to imitate and out-do them.

That is what I have in the back of my mind.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Debate of theories, maybe; debate of goals, NOT

Debate of theories is likely to go on and on in the absence of real, intensive investigation by impartial experts. As long as it's not the be-all end-all and more importantly, an avenue for disinformationists to get everyone into one unproductive tizzy after another, it isn't a problem, IMO. What MUST be debated are goals. The 9/11 Truth Movement doesn't need to agree on theories, because without subpoena power and a huge budget, they will remain theories, however plausible and compelling.

What's the goal? "A new investigation" gets thrown out a lot, but by who, and to accomplish what? Another investigation of the government by the government, regardless of which party is running the show, is not gonna work. "International war crimes tribunal" tends to get the anti-globalist truthers bent out of shape.


Another "independent" investigation will never happen and would not produce any results. I think this has to be like Watergate, an investigation that begins with a thread that eventually attaches to 9/11. Maybe there is potential in Henry Waxman?


I want to accent contacting Congress, especially new members.

Now that the Democrats have the House, fresh congressmen can be encouraged to sponsor McKinney's bill to re-open the COINTELPRO investigation which could lead to revelations about covert assassinations on US soil (Black Panthers) and other nasty business;

Also, a campaign can be started to encourage this Democratic congress to divulge the relationships between the Pentagon and the Afghan Arabs in the 1990s in the Balkans, which again leads to all sorts of uncomfortable connections - see Chossudovsky for more on this area of research;

The time is ripe for valid political pressure within the existing American framework for divestiture on all manner of intel-shop tradecraft. Unfortunately, the candidates who had 9/11 truth as part of their platform were slaughtered politically. However, a coordinated effort on several fronts (Alex Jones, ST911, 911blogger, 911truth, RBN) could have a significant impact if enough people jammed the phone lines of their representatives in the Congress and told them it's time to come clean.

The Democrats have chosen not to pursue the only useful recommendation put forward by Kean & Co.;

Democrats Reject Key 9/11 Panel Suggestion

Neither Party Has an Appetite for Overhauling Congressional Oversight of Intelligence

By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, November 30, 2006; Page A07

It was a solemn pledge, repeated by Democratic leaders and candidates over and over: If elected to the majority in Congress, Democrats would implement all of the recommendations of the bipartisan commission that examined the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

But with control of Congress now secured, Democratic leaders have decided for now against implementing the one measure that would affect them most directly: a wholesale reorganization of Congress to improve oversight and funding of the nation's intelligence agencies. Instead, Democratic leaders may create a panel to look at the issue and produce recommendations, according to congressional aides and lawmakers.

Because plans for implementing the commission's recommendations are still fluid, Democratic officials would not speak for the record. But aides on the House and Senate appropriations, armed services and intelligence committees confirmed this week that a reorganization of Congress would not be part of the package of homeland-security changes up for passage in the "first 100 hours" of the Democratic Congress.

"I don't think that suggestion is going anywhere," said Rep. C.W. Bill Young (R-Fla.), the chairman of the Appropriations defense subcommittee and a close ally of the incoming subcommittee chairman, Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.). "That is not going to be their party position."


This is yet another angle for legitimate political pressure. The intelligence shops need vastly more oversight, not less. The Democrats, Pelosi, etc., should be encouraged to not exclude intelligence oversight from their platform. If they are keen on implementing all the shitty Kean Co. recommendations, they must implement ONE good one as penance.

I say call the Reps, letters just pile up and get discarded. A jammed phone line and annoyed receptionist will feedback up the ladder.

I heard through the grapevine...

That something is supposed to be announced by Rep. Cynthia McKinney within the next week. I don't know what it pertains to, but I heard it was "good news."

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

I have a good...


"I think that we have to look at these alternative groups and these alternative people who are continuing to make films and bring their research to the public."

Sally Regenhard - 9/11 Family Member

Waht is your reasoning?

What reason do you have to believe that reorganizing the Cnogress the way Kean/Hamilton said to would actually improve oversight? Just because the WashPost says it would "imporve oversight" doesn't mean it actually would.

IIRC, the reccommendations would only *centralize* oversight,m making future cover-ups that much easier.

Investigate, Don't Speculate...

While theorizing and conversing amongst ourselves does great things for the ego, the only way to make progress is to push for it, demanding that our elected officials (remember them?) do their job and investigate the issues that the people demand of them.

However, first thing is getting enough people to demand it.

Throwing CD/Missles/CGI/etc stuff at people will only turn them away. If you focus more on the conflicts of interests, gag orders, blocked investigations, and combine the fact that governments have a history of lying to and killing their own people for political, economic, and imperial gains, it can be enough to make them go "hmmm".

///////////////////// - $1 DVDs shipped - email for info

Nice slogan


"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Pull my other leg...

it plays jingle bells


Who's interested in holding those responsible for the murder of 2,973+ people accountable?

Who's interested in playing "fantasy land" with your hosts Jim Fetzer, Judy Wood, Morgan Reynolds, Nico Haupt, and Gerard Holmgren?

"I think that we have to look at these alternative groups and these alternative people who are continuing to make films and bring their research to the public."

Sally Regenhard - 9/11 Family Member

Here ya go

Jon Gold is right.
Here is how to do the exact opposite of what the bs artists want you to do.
1. Find a basic informational brochure about 911. (I prefer the ones at
2. Print like 9 or 11 of em out.
3. Go to a place like a community college or rich neighborhood shopping mall.
4. Give them to people you see walking. Look them in the eye and say-‘here is something that you need to know about’
5. Smile and be of good spirit knowing that you are saving the country.

By the way it is also very satisfying to do this.
-'Captain' Jack


Gold is absolutely right that there are many many Americans who do not have computers and need to be contacted via more traditional grassroots activism. In San Diego our group meets on the weekends and travels to various neighborhoods to pass out flyers and DVD's. I've also been promoting an effort to inundate various cultural leaders (celebrities) with info. I'm thinking of starting a "celebrity of the week" where everyone in SD911truth would send a letter to the Oprah's and Bill Maher's of the world. Granted, people like Henry Waxman should certainly be recieving the brunt of our efforts. It's an interesting question of what the best strategy will be for pulling down the administration, be it a lawsuit, investigation, etc... Many of my family members and friends are lawyers, some even partners, but I haven't yet contacted/followed up with many of them. When I was talking with Ken Jenkins, he seemed to feel that right now we should be strictly focusing on getting our numbers up, and that the rest would become more evident along the way.


Great work...great idea...

..We all should be doing this...

I personally like going to my local library and giving Press for Truth or 911 Mysteries to parents with young children who are there...


Was just talking to a friend I haven't spoken to in a while. This person told me that the static in the movement right now (the constant infighting, debating, promotion of theories, etc...) makes us less effective than we could be (and that's putting it nicely).

They said, "We are well into fascism. When are people going to learn that we need action?" They also compared us to "World Can't Wait." How organized they appear as opposed to us.

We need to stop fighting, and we need to focus.

"We've been offered a unique opportunity and we must not let this moment pass."

— George W. Bush - State Of The Union Address - January 29th, 2002

Do you know why WCW appears organized?

Because they are organized -- by the Revolutionary Communist Party, which is an authoritarian joke. And "appear organized"? How about "are effective"? Not as far as I can tell.

As far as I can tell, both from my contacts here and from the new people in my group, 2007 *is* the year when the Truth movement becomes active (or maybe "a lot more active" is a better way to put it.)


I hope to see people in D.C. on the 26th - 28th...

"We've been offered a unique opportunity and we must not let this moment pass."

— George W. Bush - State Of The Union Address - January 29th, 2002

Their exposure of the Democratic Party "Leadership"...

...and the transparent falsity of their being an opposition party to the neo-cons,.... when they wouldn't let Rahm Emmanuel speak at his recent press conference was a nice bit of work, IMO.

I don't know about any alleged ties to the communist party....I did see some (WCW) people speaking for a lot of Americans who expected more of the Democrats than advocating a higher minimum wage and fully implementing the Zelikov Ommission Report recommendations. It got a lot of play on the MSM; that's reasonably effective.

(No subject)

I'm not completely down on WCW

believe it or not -- for one thing, I'm not sure that any of their local representatives in my city *are* associated with the RCP and various good things, like what you mentioned, are done under the auspices of WCW. But I do know that they're an RCP front organization, and *that* is why they appear as organized as they do. (I'm not a knee-jerk anti-communist, but I am pretty knee-jerk in my opposition both to authoritarianism and cults of personality.) I'll take WCW over MoveOn any day of the week.

They address the connection in their own FAQ

albeit in a rather gingerly fashion:

Some members of the RCP helped initiate the WCW

I've heard it dissected more bluntly elsewhere.

Do you not recognize that

Do you not recognize that the person you are following who is feeding you this crap is the same person who has for years tried to discredit anyone and everyone in the movement? Usually through drawing thin connections, making unsupported suggestions, underhanded threats, and everything else? The person who is feeding you this crap has done absolutely nothing in this movement but attack others, is that not totally obvious?

The person pushing this division and suggestion of "government insiders" thinks that David Ray Griffin, Alex Jones, Michael Ruppert, and everyone else in the movement is a "plane-hugger", or a "limited hangout", or "Orwellian", or whatever egotistical or divisive label he can place on them. This person has done absolutely nothing in this movement for over two years aside from his constant harassment and destruction of everyone else.

You are falling for suggestions of "government insiders" from someone who lost all credibility years ago. Judge people for their focus and actions, if someone is only focused on attacking others within the movement and nothing more then it should be pretty obvious who are the real 9/11 activists.

Why don't you list a few websites and people who you actually respect in this movement?

Evidence that supports a political decision of guilt

I have found the most success in presenting evidence which directly implicates moles within the U.S. gov't. Telling people about warnings still supports the idea that Al Qaeda is an independant entity which is capable of carrying out attacks, and bush or condi simply failed. There is such easy direct evidence to prove that there HAD to be moles involved in the attack. More people are open to the following facts than ever before

****The "Angel is Next" threats placed to Bush on the day of 9/11. The threat came through a phone which requires top secret codes to access, and the threat was spoken in a series of secret code words that are CHANGED DAILY across a multitude of intelligence agencies. This got confirmed in the New York Times, and by Condi, Cheney, Clarke, Bob Woodward and others. HAD TO BE A MOLE

****Drills!!! No chance of a coincidence! This one is always an eye opener.

****DAN RATHER'S report of Osama's whereabouts on Sept. 10th. Osama checked into a Pakistani Military Hospital in Rawalpindi on THE DAY BEFORE THE ATTACKS! This hospital is filled with Pakistani Intelligence officers who could have arrested Bin Laden..He was already wanted..and not to mention the U.S. Intelligence agencies regular contact with the hospital.

Don't get caught in evidence that relies on a minute detail and leaves people wondering......Americans are ready for MIHOP!!


This blog please.

"So where is the oil going to come from?... The Middle East, with two-thirds of the world's oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies."

Richard Cheney - Chief Executive Of Halliburton



My apologies, but the point escapes me....


We are still spending so much time debating each other.

"So where is the oil going to come from?... The Middle East, with two-thirds of the world's oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies."

Richard Cheney - Chief Executive Of Halliburton

Hear ya...


What is the Goal of 9/11 Truth? Debates, or Justice?

What is the Goal in the 9/11 Truth Community? Debates, or Justice?
by Steven E. Jones

Curiously, they put "truth and justice" on a page they call "misinformation."

Perhaps those at the above link could use the information in the previous post. They claim to be in favor of "Truth" and "Justice."

Let us see if this is true.

If they are indeed in favor of TRUTH and JUSTICE they will embrace this with great support.

The moment of truth is upon us. eh?

Well, well, well...

The Goal of the 9/11 Truth Community, at least here, has clearly displayed where it stands. Debates, or Justice?

It sure isn't Justice!

So, this begs the question:
Does the government not have a "damage control operation" in the works, yet?

Ya'll are slow to respond. Didn't you have this thought out already? Where is your "damage control spin job"?

Nice Post Andrew

Action is what will break this thing wide open. Jones appears to be a leader in the Movement, but it would appear that Dr. Wood is the one leading the charge (real activism). She is now taking the fight to NIST which is something Jones should be doing, right? Where is he? If his proof is so ironclad, where is he? Why isn't he filing RFC's with NIST?

Truth and Justice?

Isn't it interesting that the "leader" of the "truth and justice" movement doesn't seem very interested in "truth" and/or "justice"?

Doesn't it make you wonder what's really up their sleeve?

Is their goal "truth and justice" or the "sabotage of truth and justice?"

Great points, Jim!

Judy Wood is taking the lead in pursuing the perps! Great work, Judy. It's time to take a giant step forward. Keep at it! And Jim is calling a spade a spade!

No need...

To egg on divisive statements.

"So where is the oil going to come from?... The Middle East, with two-thirds of the world's oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies."

Richard Cheney - Chief Executive Of Halliburton

Jon, please remember, "The Time For Debate Is Over"

Jon Gold,

Let's see... the title of your thread is, "The Time For Debate Is Over."

This title implies that you are encouraging activism, not "endless debate." However this latest post of yours sure appears to embrace "endless debate," especially if it can obstruct truth and justice.

Your thread states that you wish to encourage "9/11 activism." But, when you are faced with TRUE activism (by Judy Wood, Morgan Reynolds, Ed Haas, and Jerry Leaphart, who are willing to courageously take on the US Government with Hard Evidence), your true goals surface. By "activism," it now becomes clear that you meant to encourage the "catapulting of propaganda," NOT TRUE activism. Thank you for making this clear.

The fact that these truly heroic acts by these courageous Americans have gone unrecognized by the powers that be of this site speaks volumes.

One question that comes to mind is, how will Steven Jones respond? Will he join in with supporting the efforts of these true American heroes or will he attempt to undermine their efforts? If history is any indication, we can expect what, 20 more ad hominem attack pieces by Jones to be posted on his website? Folks aren't fooled by the propaganda. If Jones were TRULY interested in TRUTH and JUSTICE wouldn't he spend at least some of his time on truth and justice? Why would he spend 100% of his efforts on attacking those who are seeking TRUTH and JUSTICE?

Reality is quite clear, especially now.

John, it's never too late to repent.


Is there...

A reason why you're here? No one cares about what Judy Wood, Jim Fetzer, Morgan Reynolds, Nico Haupt, and Rick Siegel have to say. Is the true reason you decided to post in this thread specifically because you wanted to start an endless debate about things no one cares about, thereby destroying the original purpose of this thread? Or, was it because you wanted people to think that the "Time For Debate Is Over", and Space Beams is the consensus among the movement?

Either way, again, no one cares about what Judy Wood, Jim Fetzer, Morgan Reynolds, Nico Haupt, and Rick Siegel have to say.

And guess what Jim, this is the last response you are going to get from me.

"So where is the oil going to come from?... The Middle East, with two-thirds of the world's oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies."

Richard Cheney - Chief Executive Of Halliburton

I don't...

Know half the people you mentioned, but the other half seems fairly accurate.

"So where is the oil going to come from?... The Middle East, with two-thirds of the world's oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies."

Richard Cheney - Chief Executive Of Halliburton

I am in Wood's camp as well...

No one is forcing those who look at her research to examine the facts. This will be very hard for the ops to contain. Now that thousands are looking, it will be hard to stop. I look forward to seening what Big Brother tries next. Mr. Gold, care to enlighten the rest of us?


Let you know as soon as they let me know.

"So where is the oil going to come from?... The Middle East, with two-thirds of the world's oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies."

Richard Cheney - Chief Executive Of Halliburton

Why "true debate" on scientific issues is never over . . .

Jon Gold displays an appalling ignorance of the nature of science when he declares that the time for true debate "is over". Scientific investigations are never "over", because it always remains possible that new evidence or new hypotheses may emerge, over time, which require the rejection of previously accepted hypotheses and theories or the acceptance of previously rejected hypotheses and theories. If he wants to declare scientific research on 9/11 to be "over", then that must be because he prefers the status quo and fears what the future may bring. He has posed as "a 9/11 activist" for all too long. It appears to me that he is nothing but a blow-hard who likes to pose as someone important but whose actual contributions--as in the present instance--only slow down or even suffocate the search for 9/11 truth. He appears to be a complete fraud. Just take a look at his contributions to this thread and sort it out for yourself. It is the Judy Woods and Morgan Reynolds and Jerry Leapharts who are carrying the fiight for truth and justice forward, not those who merely pretend they are. It is sickening to see so many fakes on blogger who are doing their best to undermine the search for truth. Debate is far from over! It has just begun!

Would someone that...

"Prefers the status quo and fears what the future may bring" ask this movement "to take it to the next level" by becoming more visibly active?

If you want to know what Jim Fetzer & Co. are about (not that it's hard to figure out without it), feel free to listen to Michael Wolsey's series on COINTELPRO available here.

And that's all I have to say about that.

"So where is the oil going to come from?... The Middle East, with two-thirds of the world's oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies."

Richard Cheney - Chief Executive Of Halliburton

FAUX News Wannabees...

Its funny. Wood and Reynolds paper is drawing dramatic interest recently and nothing is happening on 911Blogger. Just as on FAUX News when Libby is convicted and scandal after scandal hits the WH. It would seem to me that this Blog site is a haven for cointelpro that does nothing to advance activism and research about 9/11, but on the contrary seeks to funnel dissent and research into lockstep with researchers with a very checkered past (Google Heavy Watergate). The pathetic advances by the Jones' gang would tend to prove that they are neither researchers nor activists. For those of you reading these forums who are looking for real answers, check out Wood's and Reynolds' work and make up your own minds. That is all they want. Once you see the light, tell someone else. Create a chain reaction.

Los Alamos 9/11 Truth - endorses legal action by Judy Wood

Los Alamos 9/11 Truth fully endorses Judy's efforts. Unfortunately, none of our members can openly express their support, because (as classified weapons developers) they have signed secrecy and confidentiality oaths, agreements and contracts with Los Alamos National Labs, NSA, DoD ..... and so they are duty bound to keep their mouths shut about any physical evidence showing indicating the likely use of unconventional classified weaponry at Ground Zero on the morning of 9/11. Professor Steve Jones, Col Bowman, David Kubiak, Jim Hoffman, Alex Floum, Fred Burks , and so many more of our un-named DoD subcontractor affililates, are quietly sending their silent prayers - on behalf of Judy's legal action against NIST ... ...... as a way of "doing the right thing" and serving the "truth" ... (without violating their contracts of course). But please don't worry ... When it comes to calibrating and regulating the allowable 9/11 truth ... We're still pushing the envelope on limited hangouts ...

Please consider carefully the initiatives of Wood and Reynolds

It seems they have invoked a regulatory relief procedure that was most likely a corporate initiative to muddy the science on environmental issues such as climate change.

Since it was probably written by oil and chemical company lobbyists, I imagine it has some teeth to it and could be a nice sharp petard on which to hoist the complicit.

The more important the information, the higher the quality standards to which it should be held, for example, in those situations involving "influential scientific, financial, or statistical information" (a phrase defined in these guidelines).

I imagine the Office of Management and Budget defines "important" in terms of potential costs to regulated corporations, but I think we all agree that a rational explanation for 9/11 is very important.

This is not about how the public will perceive exotic weapons or no planes, nor is it about which camp is the true bastion of 9/11 truth. It is about administrative law and science.

Both submissions raise questions that we all have, and that are not necessarily tied to a particular theory. Even if parts of the submissions are absurd, which I do not think but you may or may not AFTER YOU READ THEM CAREFULLY, NIST should still have to answer the parts that raise questions we all have.

Example in Wood's submission - the so-called "collapse"
that we agree has not been explained.

Example in Reynold's submission - crash physics are clearly not explained, and this could fit, although I personally do not agree, with the "remote control plane" theory that many people seem here to have (it would fit assuming a plane exists that could penetrate without decelerating.) Anyway, the question is real and serious and Dr. Reynold's initiative to force NIST to answer to this question should not be obstructed by a knee jerk reaction to the possibility this might confirm the no planes theory. We don't know, and an effort to force NIST to explain obvious absurdities is a good thing.

It would be highly irresponsible to reject this initiative out of hand without careful consideration of the good that could result from this.

Check out what OMB says at the link above:

The primary benefit of public transparency is not necessarily that errors in analytic results will be detected, although error correction is clearly valuable. The more important benefit of transparency is that the public will be able to assess how much an agency's analytic result hinges on the specific analytic choices made by the agency. Concreteness about analytic choices allows, for example, the implications of alternative technical choices to be readily assessed. This type of sensitivity analysis is widely regarded as an essential feature of high-quality analysis, yet sensitivity analysis cannot be undertaken by outside parties unless a high degree of transparency is achieved. The OMB guidelines do not compel such sensitivity analysis as a necessary dimension of quality, but the transparency achieved by reproducibility will allow the public to undertake sensitivity studies of interest.

Yes, please, public transparency so that we can see what assumptions NIST made.

Great post Ningen...

Bravo for your open-mindedness. Just as with true believers that the OGCT is the truth, those that have not viewed the data or details presented by Wood and Reynolds yet bash them in the herd mentality are either ops or sheep. For those sheep out there, please take the time to understand what you are bashing. Otherwish, allow yourself to be thinned from the herd until you are willing to read the analyses.