Tennessee's "The Chatanoogan" Publishes long anti-New World Order OpEd.

...lists 9/11 as a New World Order crime.

America Has Never Been A Free Country

"The new world order is ruthless, and will eliminate nation states, religions, and borders. "In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn't such a great idea after all." That was the prediction of Strobe Talbot, Clinton's Deputy Secretary of State, as quoted in 'Time', July 20th, 1992. The elite have carefully manufactured major events throughout history in order to bring about this new world order, 911 included. They create the problem. We, the people, react with, "Hey, you must do something about this!" They, in return, give us the solution to the problem that they created in the first place. This is the method used to bring about policy which we would otherwise reject."


Thanks, Parrotfish.

problem. reaction. solution.

problem. reaction. solution. Alex Jones has it so right when he speaks of this.

Wow! In the MSM...and another article expanding on

this theme available here:

This is the type of information people need if they are to understand the "why" of 911 as well as the methods used.

Thanks to Reprehensor for posting it.

That is a fantastic OpEd! Also, one need not agree with Alex

Jones on everything, but IMO, he's the best at souding the alarm about the NWO & impending police state!

Web site aims to post government secrets

Not sure if this was posted earlier. Whistleblowers welcome!

Web site aims to post government secrets
Federal Times - January 4, 2007

"A new Web site that aims to encourage large-scale leaking of confidential
government documents by allowing anonymous disclosure could launch as
early as next month."

Beneath a quotation from famed Pentagon Papers leaker Daniel Ellsberg, www.Wikileaks.org says it seeks to increase government transparency around the world by using “an uncensorable version of Wikipedia for untraceable mass document leaking and analysis.”


Focus on "transparency around the world"

This looks great. It fits with an idea Ellsberg started, which I copied in my blog here, calling for those in the know in the 9-11 false-flag operation to tell what they know. It gives a safe way to do it -- not nearly as effective as the 'face the music' way that Ellsberg himself did in the 1970s (or was it 1960s?), but still very good.

It will help if we and they focus on "transparency around the world." It fits the myth that we have freedom while others do not.

We do have it on the internet. Therefore, this sort of thing will cause those in power to try to close down internet freedom. McCain's bill attempts that. Note the word 'terrorism' in the bill's title. We need to be prepared, since that battle is looming, even without this Wikileak site. Who knows, those hosting the Wikileak site might be labeled as enemy combattants.

We need a Sureme Court showdown on this issue. The Constitution is obviously on the side of internet freedom, and in very clear terms, for what that is worth...

The number of readers

"Chattanoogan.com is the fourth most read online newspaper in Tennessee. According to Alexa.com for Dec. 16, 2006, rankings are the Nashville Tennessean 11,527, the Knoxville News-Sentinel 18,613, the Memphis Commercial Appeal 31,104, and Chattanoogan.com 51,124. Chattanoogan.com is now getting about 35,000-60,000 visits a day or more and about 360,000 visits per week, so we can get customers to your website."


Let's thank the paper and the author of that piece!

Tennessee sees

Forget the stereotype of Tennessee being backwoods-backwards. Tennessee gets it. Excellent summary. 20,000 appears to be the number of troops that Bush will announce tonight he is sending to Iraq. Tomorrow, Thursday, there will be numerous demonstrations around the country. Most are billed as respectful candlelight vigils. Still, an opportunity to inject a little 9/11 Truth by way of handouts, wearing a button, etc.

Man, that was a powerful

Man, that was a powerful article. I'm increasing amps today.

One "shadowy governing body of elite..."

Author Phillips says: "The truth of the matter is that America has never been a free country." The statement looks hopeless. But he also says, "The choice is yours: Freedom or Facism? [sic]" as though things need not remain like this.

Presumably, no one will knowingly choose fascism, except 'the elites.' The question is, what do we do? How shall we get out of this?

His answer is "We can ... attempt to educate everyone..." So far so good. But if the problem is as insidious as he claims -- and it does look that way, doesn't it? -- then what?

Who can bring about structural changes, if "Whether you vote Democrat or Republican, you are voting for one shadowy, governing body of elite, who play both sides of the aisle."

Shall we suppose that voting Green will help? Libertarian? How long would our candidate last if, once in office, she did not do the bidding of whoever these elites are?


I have the oddest feeling that the elites themselves are not one item, but fragmented. They are just people. Also, in essential ways 'they' absolutely depend on us for their power -- on our attitudes, fears, desires, and actions. Change these, and 'they' will have no power at all.

Again, who are 'they'? Just various individuals -- a drug-lord here, an international banker there, our own current vice pres., the heads of most intelligence agencies. No one of them feels in charge either; the system itself sets the policy. Greed sets the policy. Greed, fear, drug addiction and other addictions, and we-versus-them mentality. 'They' manipulate these weaknesses of ours.

Educate people, including ourselves, to rise above both greed and we-versus-them mentality. That is not easy, but if we did it, it would work, wouldn't it?

Who are they?

They, ultimately, are the international bankers. The others you mentioned (drug-lords, vp, heads of intelligence agencies) are (disposable) underlings.
There are the bankers (creating "money" out of thin air) and then, way down, there are the rest of the players.
Governments are useful tools. Wars are profit.

Your central point, that once the problems have been identified a viable solution will be required, is an important one.

The war is for your mind (and all our minds). Widespread exposure of the tools and methods used to control the people is the essential precursor to additional "structural changes".

While there is no "one" , there is a "they". In our world today, the bankers lead and all others follow.

I hope Loose Change" final cut is not realeased at only a few,

select, "indie-art-house" theaters in a couple of major cities! It needs major, coast-to-coast & worldwide release!

Just look at the tremendous distribution that Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 911 got. (Probably because it promoted the idea that 9/11 happened due to our incompetence.)

Aaron Russo's "Freedom to Fascism" is a masterpiece that was hardly shown anywhere, due to what I believe was blatant censorship. Let’s not let this happen to LC Final Cut!

I disagree

If the makers of LC cared more about 9/11 truth than their own self-promotion they would cede the field altogether. They would admit that they completely fucked up the case for an inside job with their naive acceptance of falsehoods, apocrypha and red herrings like the Pentagon missile and the "Cleveland Airport Mystery" and the supposed faking of all phone calls, even from airphones. (And, originally, "the pod.") They would admit that adding new versions doesn't really overcome the stigma of having fucked up earlier versions so completely (Marvin Bush as head of WTC security, Wikipedia as a source), and show some humility. They would give their talk show air time to Griffin and try to pump the resources about to be wasted on yet another LC into promoting a nationwide double-feature release of Improbable Collapse and 9/11 Press for Truth, which cover all of the same issues but with actual facts and argument.

All you need to do is watch

All you need to do is watch the LC guys in debate. They're hardly self centered and arrogant. The original ideas they pushed have been modified as the strength of evidence has evolved. You sound pretty dim witted with the statements you're making considering that they have adjusted their arguements in light of additional evidence.

When ideas are proposed they may be wildly off the mark and the sign of genuine integrity is changing with new knowledge. Griffen has been on the mark with most of his arguements but the man has experience over the LC guys. If it wasn't for the LC guys getting their first video out there many of us would not have been turned on to the questions regarding 9/11. Being a researcher myself it peaked my interest. I didn't agree with some assertions they made but that's because I can think for myself. All in all the guys have helped the movement. No one is perfect so mellow out man.

Show "The Truth About the 911 Truth Movement,Steven Jones,& 911Blogger" by CB_Brooklyn

Fuck off.

Fuck off with your CGI shit.

Show "Make it stop, it's hurting my brain..." by Ned Stone (not verified)

What is it that you are

What is it that you are proposing is evidence of Directed energy weapons? WTC1 &2 seem to me to be a different form of CD. I, unlike many nitwits on here, do acknowledge DEW weapons as hypothesized by Tesla over half a century ago; however, other than some anomalies with the cars in the area of WTC 1 & 2, I don't know what evidence you're pointing to. The subterrainian explosions implicate the initiation of CD. Would DEW need that to perform the job? If not, then why were there subterrainian explosions. Having research experience I am open minded to DEW being used during 9/11 but I haven't seen anything to make me think that it was DEFINITELY used. It is my understanding that if directed energy is used we should probably see some visible sign of it. When Tesla performed his experiments at Colorado Springs the Directed energy he produced was visually similar to lightening. Shouldn't we see something of that nature? The directed energy is (to my understanding) electrons being shuttled from one point to another. In nature lightening is the closest thing to this effect. Sooo...am I misunderstanding the phenonmenon?

Combination of methods?

Good question.

Possibility: CD on lower floors (20?), DEW on top.

They would need some CD to insure a rubble pile and explosions for "cover". Pulverizing the entire structure would not leave enough rubble to sell the collapse story (even briefly).

Total pulverization of the top 80+% of the towers (as seen in the videos) would require either DEW or nukes.
The top down quality of the pulverization makes DEW from above appear more likely.

DEW - what better way to demonstrate your REAL capabilities (to those "in the know")

Any brief visual elements would have been edited out (or masked) before broadcast.

The car photos are a mixed bag and (I believe) not the best evidence.

I myself have mentioned that

I myself have mentioned that maybe DEW could have been used in conjunction; however, where is the evidence of DEW? If DEW was used we would have reports about the phenomenon. Where are the reports? I've seen/heard plenty of evidence pointing to CD from the fire fighters but where are the comments about DEW? How brief would the visual elements be? If DEW was used for everything above X floors then that segment would have to be edited on every video we've ever seen. How easy would it be to edit out "lightening" type effects? I'll give you the fact that they were the two tallest buildings around which would make them easier as a target but why would the DEW damage the two buildings rather than use them as conductors to the ground through their massive steel lattice work? To the best of my knowledge Concrete is probably an insulator. So really I don't know what you're getting at? If DEW was used shouldn't we expect some electrical arcing to occur?

And who exactly would they be demonstrating to? The theories regarding DEW have been around long enough that any country could easily implement it. If Tesla could do it in the middle of nowhere Colorado Springs with minimal funding so could every third world dictator....I'm happy DEW is coming to light but really the way it's being introduced to the public makes it sound like total science fiction.

Many details are unknown (at this time)

Some of these (DEW) beams are visible, some are not. The more complex versions utilize multiple beams to track, ID, target and destroy. Further investigation and consideration may well bring us closer to exactly what device/method was used.
Available evidence (videos, photos) appears to show the towers were instantaneously pulverized from the top down in a manner which (I believe we agree) is inconsistent with traditional explosive controlled demolition. Furthermore, the symmetrical nature of the destruction indicates a planned, controlled event. If we eliminate traditional CD and airplane-and-fire-induced collapse, DEW appears to be one of two remaining options.
A series of micro nukes (top to bottom with one having been used in the basement at same time as "plane hit") is also a possibility.
If your looking for an account of exactly what did happen, I don't have it nor is it likely to be found without "inside" information.
We are left to examine the available evidence and reach conclusions where we can.

If you'd like a quick look at some smaller, current energy weapons: http://www.surfingtheapocalypse.net/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=164356
(notice the quite pentagonesque streak seen striking the test wall in #3)

Without digressing into a discussion on video manipulation, I will say that real-time manipulation/insertion exist and has existed since before 9/11.
link: http://www.nodeception.com/articles/pixel.jsp

Demonstration of capability would be intended for any would-be opponents of the perps.

Do you have an alternative hypothesis which accounts for all or most of the observed phenomena?

Go tell your handler Wood

Go tell your handler Wood that her paper on star wars beam weapons just got p0wn3d -> http://www.journalof911studies.com/letters/Gourley5JAN07.pdf

Good dog.

Show "9/11 Truthers: Unskilled and Unaware of It:" by Anonymous (not verified)

I would have to say that you

I would have to say that you fall within the category of individuals who suffer the ability to perform logical analysis. The paper you cite was published in 1999. YOU are the individual claiming it represents the 9/11 truthers. Unfortunately, due to your inability to perform logical analyses you have missed the fact that this study supposedly applies to all people equally, not just "truthers". This is what is called external validity. Additionally, the study is assessing individuals ability to find humor. Humor is not an objective thing. It it highly subjective (If you're having problems following me pick up a psych 101 text.). The "truth" movement is attempting to assess objective facts not subjective humor, hence your conclusion is invalid. If you're going to take the time to find articles and cite them you should make sure they are relevant to your conclusion. Otherwise you're going to have individuals like me who have scored in the top decile for scientific reasoning setting you straight ; ). I hope that you can recognize your own deficit in scientific reasoning and work to improve it(of course having a psychology research background I understand your genetics are going to limit just how much you can improve your reasoning skills...sorry =( ).

-Ignoramus Maximus

Why would you admit you are clueless???

Otherwise you\'re going to have individuals like me who have scored in the top decile for scientific reasoning setting you straight.

Anyone admitting he buys into the puerile nonsense of the 9/11 Truth Movement and claims he has any ability in scientific reasoning is confirming the validity of the paper I cited as it applies to 9/11 Truthers.

Thank you for confirming that for us. Now, seek help for yourself, Big Guy.

You're simply reinforcing my

You're simply reinforcing my prior statements.

"Anyone admitting he buys into the puerile nonsense of the 9/11 Truth Movement and claims he has any ability in scientific reasoning is confirming the validity of the paper I cited as it applies to 9/11 Truthers."

That's a bold statement you're making there. Too bad you lack any evidence to back it up. You see, in science, when you make a statement(whether or not it's bold) you follow it up with evidence. The paper you cite has absolutely zero relevance as I have already stated. The paper uses psychometrics to assess a subjective issue, humor, which is completely irrelevant with regards to the objective analysis of 9/11. What part of that do you not get? Subjective != Objective. It's not a complex idea. Did you even read the entire paper? Or did you just do a pubmed search and grab something with an interesting title to try to make your statement sound stronger?

Let me reiterate the validity of the paper. The subjects are supposed to be representative of the human population as a whole(external validity, look it up bozo). Most studies are performed in such a manner that they will have a strong external validity otherwise they only apply to a select group(internal validity). You are claiming that the study represents the issues "truthers" are dealing with. This is simply not true because of the fact that "truthers" make up a sub sample of the entire human population which is what the study is supposed to apply to. The problem facing you is that you are attempting to claim that a study with subjective parameters applies to "truthers" only. This study is supposed to apply to the entire human population.

"Why would you admit you are clueless???"

You seem to have a knack for making up facts as you go. You would go far as a Bush scientist. Every one else would just laugh at you. I highly recommend you learn the difference between external and internal validity because the statements your making weigh heavily on those things. If you can grasp the differences between the two you'll understand the fallacy of your claim. Not everyone is blessed with robust frontal lobes but with more reading maybe you'll get there! ;)

Oh one other thing. You

Oh one other thing. You might want to call the standardized testing services for the ACT, SAT, and GRE's to let them know that their tests are allowing idiots like me into places of higher learning and government positions...better let 'em know before the country is over run by my ilk and I.


-Ignoramus Maximus


Matt Drudge sinks to a new low.

speaking of Matts, time to drop in on Taibbi!!


Brave Matt Taibbi has been too busy touring Iraq and remarking on "play station cassettes" to get back to us on the physics of 9/11 as he had promised. Why not remind him that we haven't forgotten? And that we will NEVER FORGET how he tried to help the 9/11 peprs cover their tracks?


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force


New World Order has begun

The gov't already rountinely violates our Constitutional rights.
They violate the 1st Amendment by opening our mail, caging demonstrators and banning books like "America Deceived" from Amazon.
They violate the 2nd Amendment by confiscating guns during Katrina.
They violate the 4th Amendment by conducting warrant-less wiretaps.
They violate the 5th and 6th Amendment by suspending habeas corpus.
They violate the 8th Amendment by torturing.
They violate the entire Constitution by starting 2 illegal wars based on lies and on behalf of a foriegn gov't.
The New World Order is upon us.
Last link (unless Google Books caves to the gov't and drops the title):

ERROR: America Deceived does not appear to be banned from Amazon

I don't see this book banned from amazon. In fact, I see a copy of it available for sale (as of writing this - this link might get someone to buy it for all i know)

As for why only the marketplace has it, i suspect that more had to do with the people printing the book than Amazon making any censorship attempt. Given the dozens upon dozens of other conspiracy books they have available for sale, it seems ridiculous for them to target one particular book.

Check your sources! Don't succumb to cut-and-paste syndrome! I do think America is in danger of becoming a police state, but false accusations don't help people recognize that!

Fascism Lite - Now with 75% less mass murder and 25% more public appeal!

Why does this movement engage in self-delusion?

People, this is not publication in the MSM. First of all, there is no evidence this article is appearing in the print edition of The Chatanoogan.

Here is the front page of The Chatanoogan today:
Do you see any evidence on that page that this article exists?

If you happen to click on Opinion (out of the many options available), you get this:
The article in question is not featured in the main column. But at the top of the second column, it gets a one-line headline under "Other Opinion." It is at the top presumably because it is the most recent submission. Other items there include editorials about parking space problems in Chattanooga.

In other words, this supposed "publication" is little more than a nod allowing a reader-submitted post, and has no more significance than a blog or forum post or what was once known as a "Letter to the Editor." Are we really this starving for success that we need to misrepresent it?

The article itself is typical "NWO" mystification. The relations of ownership and power vested in a ruling class are obscured by a focus on surface organizational epiphenomena like the Trilateral Commission (which could be broken up or reorganized into some other form tomorrow without changing anything in the world).

The complete program of presumed NWO-ism is attributed to the ruling elites based on a thin sheen of evidence, like the near-ancient flyer by an FBI bureau office in Arizona that happens to mention "Christians" in association with terrorism. (Meanwhile, the real empire builders are concentrating on securing their regions in a time of global economic crisis.)

Anyone who thinks the mobsters in charge are targetting "Christians" per se is playing out their own persecution fantasies. As the real-existing civilization proceeds toward global war and environmental collapse, it's a fantasy we can little afford to entertain.

How does one manage to write a piece purportedly about the world order that talks of "Illuminati" but not of the self-evident realities of capitalism? Can anyone show a real-existing "Illuminati" spokesperson, confessor, witness, document?!

Is the reality that power is held in secret and politics stage-managed by way of coups and psyops like 9/11 not scary enough? Do we need to embellish it with religious mythology and junk history to make it feel scarier?

Well written, yet so ignorant.

Am I to infer from this that you believe the 'Illuminati' to be 'junk history'?

Might I suggest you look a little further back through history than the last fifty years?

"The one who cannot see that on Earth a big endeavor is taking place, an important plan, on which realization we are allowed to collaborate as faithful servants, certainly has to be blind" - Winston Churchill

"It is not my intention to doubt that the doctrine of the Illuminati and the principles of Jacobinism had not spread in the United States. On the contrary, no one is more satisfied of this fact than I am." - George Washington

"The most wonderful thing of all is that the distinguished Lutheran and Calvinist theologians who belong to our order really believe that they see in it (Illuminati) the true and genuine sense of Christian Religion. Oh mortal man, is there anything you cannot be made to believe?" - Adam Weishaupt

"Of all the means I know to lead men, the most effectual is a concealed mystery. The hankering of the mind is irresistible." - Adam Weishaupt

"The government, which was designed for the people, has got into the hands of the bosses and their employers, the special interests. An invisible empire has been set up above the forms of democracy." - Woodrow Wilson

"... in politics nothing is accidental. If something happens, be assured it was planned this way" - Franklin D. Roosevelt

"The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes." - Benjamin Disraeli

the usual...

Typical way of arguing for this case. I'm supposed to infer the existence of the "Illuminati" from a bunch of general and vague quotes, no context given. (Context = text or situation from which the quote is taken, at least approximate year, subject they were talking about, etc.)

This is a religious way of believing things.

Who are the "illuminati" today? What's your case that they exist, call themselves by this name, and actually run things as "the Illuminati" (and not merely by force of owning the means of finance and production anyway).

You want 'context'?

"We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries." - David Rockefeller, founder of the Trilateral Commission, in an address to a meeting of The Trilateral Commission, in June, 1991.

What do you know about the Council On Foreign Relations? (Once, not long ago, considered to be a wild 'conspiracy theory', by the way) The Trilateral Commission? A good place to start for the curious.

I suspect

I know more about the CFR than you think I do, or perhaps than you do.

For one thing, I am aware that it was never a "conspiracy theory" since it is openly the institution within which members of the ruling elites present, devise, debate and scheme over "foreign policy" a.k.a. imperialism.

There is no need to mystify this institution, it exists in the open, its functions are clear, and it's even worse than the cartoon version you seem to prefer.

You still haven't produced documentation of a group calling itself "the Illuminati" that exists today and runs the world (or is trying to impose a plan for a "New World Order"). You're recycling the same set of supposedly revealing and not necessarily related quotes that I've seen many times.

How do you know this quote is substantiated? It's awfully convenient, don't you think? I believe this is how D.R. actually thinks. But I don't believe he said it in such a neat, movie-speech package, wrapping in all the elements just like that.

Source this quote if you can.

"The Illuminati" is a comic book fantasy for those who think talking about capitalism is for godless commies.

"The Illuminati" is a comic book fantasy for those who think....

.....talking about capitalism is for godless commies".


Pray tell, who did utter this pearl? I have to know....

I am friendly with a few people that this describes perfectly.

But never mind...

Challenging the local cult beliefs, regardless of merit, seems to be prompting the believers to hide my comments. People who have bought into the NWO-is-coming-to-eat-the-Christians religion are just as bad as the pathological OCTers. It's a pathetic form of denial to push "minus" on my comments, but it's effective... Why should I waste my time in such a predictable exchange? See you some other time.

Well Nick, Not sure what you're crying about...

since I'm the only one in this thread with a 'minus' on their comments, and could really care less, not what I'm here for. I guess ridicule, hate & ignorance gets you a 'positive' nod from the disinfo lap-dogs.

Let me just say, in general, that I'll take the words of men in the know over some schmuck on a blog. I never said they call themselves the 'Illuminati'. That was your 'pathetic' attempt at detraction from the fact that a small group of elites have always thought they were better and knew best.

And yes, Back in the 80's, 90's the CFR was considered a 'conspiracy theory', if only by the right-wing nut-jobs like rush limbaugh. Hell, their website's only little more than four years old.

I used to feel the same as you regarding xianity & religion in general, I have since seen the light (LOL). Not all xian 'cult members' are ignorant, knuckle dragging, sheeple. Dr. Jones & David Griffen come foremost to mind. Just be careful with the words you choose, if I may. 9/11 truth is a very diverse community including Christian, Jews, Mormons, Muslims.. etc, Hell, even asshole agnostics like me who like to stir things up, and we're all seeking truth.

It all boils down to freedom, my friend. Believe/do what you will as long as you don't harm me or try to force your beliefs/ideals on me. As it should be, as it was meant to be when America was founded. Peace.

I hope you follow up with comments about the op-ed

From Chattanogians (?). Even if you don't, each article likes this works like the ceaseless waves on the bolder of ignorance.


that son of a bitch.

Micheal Smerconish. that son of a bitch. i get e-mails from Smerconish because he filled in for O'Reilly or somebody and did a story on 9/11 conspiracy theories and i e-mailed him like most of us probably did. well i get an e-mail from him today and it compares holocaust denial with 9/11 truth(he does it with an argument defending free speech. how cute). here is the entire disgusting e-mail from him in full(im sorry its so long,i dont have a link for it and felt i needed to put it in context anyway):


"If we really want to know the truth about history we need to allow freedom of speech."

So I was told by David Duke in an interview three weeks ago via a scratchy transatlantic connection from Tehran. Duke was then in Iran as a participant in Mahmoud Admadinejad's conference concerning the Holocaust.

David Duke does not speak for me. I have followed his career and find his repeated condemnation of Israel and her supporters to be abhorrent. Nevertheless, I knew that my acceptance of an invitation to interview the former Ku Klux Klan Imperial Wizard would itself cause a stir. It did. But I was willing to speak to him because I was then on the verge of traveling to the most deadly of all Nazi extermination camps and I wanted to hear what a self-described revisionist had to say.

The fringes represented by Duke argue that laws in Europe which prohibit Holocaust denial inhibit an analysis that could otherwise reveal the Holocaust to be historical exaggeration which exists to justify the legitimacy of Israel. No Holocaust or exaggerated description? Then there's no justification for the creation of the state of Israel in the minds of these few.

I've now just returned from a visit to Auschwitz, and I find that I agree with David Duke that Europeans should be free to debate the Holocaust, but not for reasons with which he would concur. Having seen the haunting, ghastly evidence which I have just examined, my view is that it's far easier to defeat the deniers with fact and logic rather than risk fostering skepticism which comes from making those views illegal to espouse. It is through the clash of truth vs. falsity that the merits of veracity about the Holocaust are most readily seen.

My trip had been planned for nearly a year. I'm one of a half-dozen Philadelphia friends, three of whom are Jewish, who for the last several years have traveled together in the first week of January to historical sites. We've been to Theodore Roosevelt's "Sagamore Hill", in Oyster Bay, New York; the Reagan library in Simi Valley; and Winston Churchill's underground bunker where he withstood the Battle of Britain. We read. We drink. We investigate.

This year we were very serious in purpose.

We began in Berlin at the Wannsee Villa where on January 20, 1942, fifteen representatives of the Third Reich plotted the "final solution". In their actual meeting room, we read the protocol written by Adolf Eichmann which set forth the plan to murder European Jews. Then we saw where it was implemented.

We visited "Track 17" in the fashionable Grunewalt section of Berlin. This is a former rail station that was the point of departure for Jews from the area being sent to the camps. Memorialized today adjacent to the tracks are the dates, number of passengers, and destination of the rail cars.

Our next stop was the other end of those tracks, in Poland.
On a raw, dark, rain swept day we spent four hours walking the grounds of Auschwitz I and Auschwitz II-Birkenau.

We saw it all. At Auschwitz I, we walked through the infamous gate ("Work Brings Freedom"). We toured the surviving crematorium. We saw the ghastly displays of real human hair, personal effects, suitcases, and even shoe polish, all confiscated from the prisoners who'd packed in haste under the ruse of a "re-settlement". Present for inspection were also empty canisters which once held Zyclon B in pellet form, the agent used to exterminate human life in the crematoriums.

At Auschwitz II-Birkenau we stood on the platform where Jews were divided between those who were to be immediately gassed and those who would live for at least a while longer. This was where Elie Wiesel, in his chilling memoir Night, recounts having survived this selection process as a teenager at the hand of Dr. Josef Mengele. We also surveyed up close the ruins of crematorium II, the most prolific of the Nazi's death machines, which was largely destroyed by the Nazis in an unsuccessful effort to hide their crimes against humanity.

It was there that I pondered the critical question: If the Holocaust, fully in evidence by that which then existed in front of me, is not subject to reasonable debate, should all argument to the contrary be unlawful? Close to twenty nations say yes, and ban Holocaust denial. Austria is one such nation, and only recently released imprisoned historian David Irving.

Our tour guide is one of many who believe those laws to be justified. She thinks them necessary as a safeguard for properly educating future generations about what occurred.
I agree with her that our goal must be to ensure the understanding of future generations. But I don't see those laws as a means to that end. It occurs to me that the European ban of debate on the Holocaust would be akin to America disallowing argument on the whacky 9/11 conspiracy theories that exist on the Internet.

There are many, credible-looking websites that have become clearing houses for rumor and innuendo about the attack on the Pentagon. A missile some argue, not a passenger airplane. (Overlooking, of course, the issue of what then happened to American Airlines Flight 77 and its passengers?) The most effective way of dealing with such propaganda is to discredit it point by point, not to make unlawful its utterance, which runs the risk of fueling skepticism. With regard to 9/11, Popular Mechanics did so exquisitely in both magazine, and then book form.

It should be the same with regard to Holocaust revisionists. The way to combat their mindset is with total openness and a climate of candor about all aspects of WWII. That includes providing full access to even those locations that run the risk of cultivating morbid curiosity.

In Berlin, our group stayed in the world famous Hotel Adlon at the foot of the Bradenburg Gate. The concierge was happy to provide me with a map suggesting a walking tour of the neighborhood. Included on the map were both the Reichstag, home of the German Parliament, and the Memorial for the Murdered Jews of Europe. Missing, however, was any reference to what's beneath a non-descript, surface parking lot adjacent to an apartment complex, just 100 yards behind the hotel. That was the location Hitler's "Fuehrerbunker".

Not until the World Cup came to Germany last year was any placard installed to note the significance of the location where Hitler killed himself as Russian troops stormed the Reichstag. That too is the incorrect response to a hideous chapter of German history. Not only should the location of the Fuehrerbunker be noted, it should arguably be unearthed and opened to the public.

Such were my views upon arriving back home. But my reflection was not over. I then had the chance to question one of the world's foremost historians, Sir Martin Gilbert, official biographer of Winston Churchill and author of Auschwitz and the Allies as well as The Holocaust: A History of the Jews of Europe During the Second World War, amongst close to eighty other books. This week, I asked him whether he thinks Holocaust denial should be against the law.

"This is a very difficult question. I attended almost everyday of the Irving/Libstadt trial and I heard from the mouth of the Holocaust denier the most terrifying racism and anti-Semitism. I thought to myself, if this person is allowed to spread his word to ignorant audiences or audiences who want to be prejudiced that's a bad thing. So when the Austrian government (of all governments as Austria was so complicit in the Nazi destruction) imprisoned him for his denial, I thought, 'Well he knew the law, he broke the law and the Austrians have a right to feel that this is something inflammatory and wrong.'

"I've been much criticized by fellow historians who say, 'How can you put a historian in jail?' But I think every country has the right to its own laws. And I'm impressed if you say that your tour guide at Auschwitz said that because although one might disagree - and as you say free speech is tremendously important in our society and debate and argument and I'm all for that - I'm all for every Holocaust denier being able to speak in a forum where there's someone who is going to challenge him or her. At the same time countries like Poland know that Holocaust denial, anti-Semitism, racism take on a life of their own."

I told Sir Martin Gilbert that I believe we give credibility and credence to the minuscule number of deniers by not permitting that kind of dialogue. I worry that there will be a level of skepticism in future generations who'll question why are we able to debate but that.

"You're absolutely right and I think the key word is dialogue," said Gilbert. "I'm totally in favor of every Holocaust denier being able to speak provided he or she allows there to be a dialogue. I'm willing to travel the world or get up at the crack of dawn in order to be present at such a debate. And many other historians, Jews and non-Jews, will do the same. So that's fine. And the other thing I feel, and I think I'm right, is that Holocaust denial is really quite a minor thing. I mean it has its fling on the Internet; it has its few adherents who travel everywhere, as they did to Ahmadinejad's Anti Holocaust conference - they made a pathetic showing actually there. I think that what is important is the amount of material about the Holocaust, much of that you'd have seen in the Auschwitz bookshop published by Auschwitz itself - records, diary, the enormous number of superb memoir from Elie Wiesel's Night on. These things are available they're taught in school. American schools have a very good record mandating Holocaust teaching."

I then told Gilbert about my Berlin experience and suggested that the Fuehrerbunker be unearthed and opened to the public. He agreed.

"It's extraordinary that you say that because when I traveled around Europe with my students about 10 years ago - and I wrote a book about that called Holocaust Journey - Traveling in Search of the Past and I have maps of each town - Berlin, Krakow, Warsaw and so forth - and what to see - I was myself astonished and I mentioned in the book that there wasn't a plaque there. I'm glad to hear there is albeit only a small one. And I agree totally with you there should be complete openness. There should be complete transparency and the Bunker should be open for the world to see. Particularly if Germany is now making films about the Fuehrer - and I think the latest one is a humorous one. So let the Bunker be open, let it become a place of pilgrimage if you like and a place of learning as so many Holocaust sites are today."

Finally, I shared all of this with a close friend who lost family in the Holocaust. We discussed whether free speech should exist on the issue of Holocaust denial. He was unsure. But he acknowledged that laws banning Holocaust denial are probably an insufficient blanket to put out that fire.

i urge everyone to e-mail Micheal Smerconish and tell him how you feel about slimy tactics like comparing questioning 9/11 with holocaust denial.



I can see it now...

The day when you're jailed, threatened, even burned out of your home, for '9/11 denial'.

For those interested in making up their own minds...

The Search for Truth in History - David Irving

The Truth Behind The Gates of Auschwitz

One Third of the Holocaust

Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews

Peace, Propaganda & The Promised Land

I saw a video by I believe,

I saw a video by I believe, David Cole(on google or youtube). He is a jew who went to at least one camp and made the case that Gas chambers were never used on people. One of the supposed chambers used to be some sort of office that had the walls knocked out after the war and was labeled a gas chamber. Some of the evidence he used to support his view included the complete lack of residue in the "chamber" of the gas. In another building in the camp there was plenty of the residue and a bluish tint covering all surfaces. This building was confirmed to be the disinfectant building for louse and other parasites on the prisoners clothes. Regarding the extremely poor health of prisoners when they were freed, all one has to do is look for comparision at American pow's in camps. Their health was very poor especially in Japanese camps. When one side is losing the war and supplies are low prisoners are going to be the last to recieve food which would led to malnurishment. I do believe that millions of Jews were killed however some of the means employed are questionable. Check out Norman Finkelstein among others for more information regarding the "holocaust industry" as he calls it.

Yes, The David Cole video was in the list.

'The Truth Behind The Gates of Auschwitz'

Very informative, to say the least.

"One of the supposed chambers used to be some sort of office that had the walls knocked out after the war and was labeled a gas chamber."

The only 'gas chamber' was a bomb shelter that was made into a make-shift gas chamber, after the war, by the Soviets. Dr. Franciszek Piper, senior curator and director of archives at Auschwitz, admits this on camera.

Not sure who made 'One Third of the Holocaust'. Very well documented & thought provoking, although a pretty long film with a lot of boring things like math & logic (4:15:20). I suspect a very well researched Historian had a hand in this. Well worth the time if you're interested in this subject.

Alan Hart's Zionism: The

Alan Hart's Zionism: The Real Enemy is amazing.

if you stick a mirror

if you stick a mirror underneath the first words ---on the cover of sgt pepper
it says this


this was part of the "paul is dead" clues which said that paul mccartney died in 1966 and was replaced by an "imposter"

it doesnt matter if you believe that or not---check this out----->

the words that is says "XI IX I DIE"---
this is said to reference the date that paul mccartney died on----

now in england they do the date backwards--like today would be written
10-01-07 instead of 01-10-07----

so the drum says "911 i die"--------that is freaky

and then it is said that sep 11 -01 was the first day of the new millenium according to the teutonic calendar


this is at a site called "the king is dead" which shows all the clues in the paul is dead bullshit
but you know it is weird------the nwo's "spooky magic art" wing
(of which the beatles are a part of being hired by weapons maker emi)

theyve been planning on doing something stupid on 9-11-01 for years

this is proof as one of their stupid clues----

these people do not deserve to be leaders of other humans

Who cares?

Why don't you tell us once more about how the Jooz were gonna blow up the Mexican parliament, because we didn't hear it the first 100,000 times.

not "the joos"----just a

not "the joos"----just a select group of mossad traitors working for the cfr

fucking nitwit

wake up

and since you brought it up------

i challenge you to defeat that smoking gun

the attempted mexican nationial parliament bombing smoking gun---
the ultimate smoking gun of the 911inside job ----besides wtc 7

proof of mossad involvement---in tandem with corrupt people in u.s. govt

to murder people for abstract bullshit

dont worry-----you dont have to reply anonymous pussy

Show me...

Here is the cover of Sgt. Pepper's. Where do I stick the mirror?


where it says "lonely hearts

where it says "lonely hearts club"

stick the mirror in the middle of the words----to where the top half of the words reflect back at itself

like it doubles the top half back on itself

google 'paul is dead'---and go down a few sites to one called'''the king is dead"

its pretty creepy

it shows how it works

Nice Work

Very nice work. Concise and factual, nice use of quotes.

This article did a great job of showing how all of this can be done legally, but it seems like to this administration legality is not an issue.

Consider how Bush has spent billions promoting his agenda through the use of paid shills in the “mainstream” media. This is illegal, but Bush has thumbed his nose at this law.

Nice to read the truth for a change.