Framing The Truth Movement As Terrorists

Framing The Truth Movement As Terrorists

Bellicose establishment hacks like O'Reilly and Beck pray for another attack so they can blame it on peaceful activists who are putting them to shame

Steve Watson & Paul Joseph Watson

A disturbing trend has emerged amongst establishment "news" hacks who are raising the same talking point ad infinitum, dubbing the global truth movement as "anarchists" and violent individuals who may be aiding terrorists, and praying for another attack in America so they can blame peaceful activists who are consistently putting the Neo-Cons to shame.

Over the past weeks and months talking heads such as Fox News bigot Bill O'Reilly and his frothing caricature Glenn Beck over on CNN, have specifically targeted 9/11 truthers in segments designed to portray the movement as dangerous and sow the seed in the minds of what viewers they have left that peaceful truth seekers are actually in league with violent terrorists.

Two weeks ago Beck aired a response to the We Are Change infiltration of Bill Maher's show in which he stated:

"These truthers are exactly the kind of people who want to rock this nation's foundation, tear us apart and plant the seeds of dissatisfaction in all of us."

At one point Beck even suggested that the 9/11 truth movement is "the kind of group a Timothy McVeigh would come from", insinuating the movement is intent on violence and terrorism.

In thousands of 9/11 protests over the course of the last six years, not one person has been arrested for violent conduct. To carte blanche suggest that the truth movement is dangerous, "a threat to children" and intent on violence is extremely inflammatory and indicates just how afraid of everyday people investigating and debating the facts people like Glenn Beck actually are.

The core of the 9/11 truth movement is composed of well educated and rational thinking individuals who are strictly opposed to violence and are intent on protecting a free and peaceful society which has been under dire threat ever since the attacks of 9/11 and the ensuing cover up.

Furthermore, the movement represents the very antithesis of anarchism in that it is actively seeking to restore and protect our traditional form of government which has been usurped by an unaccountable cabal that continues to operate outside of Constitutional law and with little restraint, using 9/11 as justification.

Most recently Bill O'Reilly has been running segments, such as the one below, suggesting that questions over 9/11, the war on terror and the war in Iraq are "going to lead to violence":

O'Reilly flat out states "This is going to lead to death" and makes all kind of threats stating, "If they are not reigned in by the authorities, and they should be...somebody is going to get hurt."

We could announce that Bill O'Reilly is dangerous and aids terrorists, based on O'Reilly's own standard for claiming that people are dangerous and aid terrorists - i.e. no evidence whatsoever except the fact that he disagrees with their politics.

If anyone is a threat to the American way of life then it's Beck and O'Reilly - having implicated themselves with a history of repugnant statements proving they are enemies of the Constitution and the freedoms that define America.

In addition, the only violent statements made on 9/11 truth websites have been written by trolls and debunkers attempting to discredit the movement - they should be investigated for advocating violence, not peaceful activists who are merely trying to speak truth to power.

People like O'Reilly and Glenn Beck would relish the opportunity to have their baseless allegations "proved right", and should some act of violence or terrorism be carried out, whether real or staged, they would love to blame it on the 9/11 truth movement, in a similar way to how the patriot movement was blamed for the OKC bombing in 1995.

With the explosion of the alternative media and with more and more people confronting government officials and elitist figures from the US to Canada to the UK, in "guerilla journalism" style, the mainstream media has come to realize that they can no longer get away with reporting only one side of the story.

Figures like Beck and O'Reilly are running scared because they know the people are no longer buying into their manipulative propaganda and are searching for the truth themselves.

Such shameful tactics are not going to work because the horse has already bolted and the seeds of truth have been scattered over the globe by the winds of change.

What we are witnessing is the establishment's desperate attempt to cling onto their information monopoly as the Internet, alternative radio and guerilla activism grow in leaps and bounds while the mainstream withers away and loses all credibility.

As Gandhi said - First they ignore us, then they laugh at us, and then they attack us.

Then we win.

"Furthermore, the movement

"Furthermore, the movement represents the very antithesis of anarchism in that it is actively seeking to restore and protect our traditional form of government which has been usurped by an unaccountable cabal that continues to operate outside of Constitutional law and with little restraint, using 9/11 as justification."

You should be careful of using statements such as these, as there are those within the 9/11 truth community, while opposed to violence, DO in fact hold an anti-authoritarian stance and would wish to see all forms of empire crumble. Some truthers ARE indeed anarchists, myself included. Now just because I believe in and advocate a form of anarchism doesn't in any way imply that I support or defend the use of violence. The 2, despite the prescribed stigma, do not inherently go hand in hand. Now if the 9/11 truth and justice movement succeeds, there is the all-too-real possibitly that the American structure will come a'crashing down. As Dr. Griffin once stated, the implications for revolution would be radical. So as to the hope of restoring the Constitutional republic to the way it "once was", that very likely could be nothing more than a pipe-dream. If 9/11 justice is carried out, there is no telling how fundamental the following changes could be. We're approaching new terrain here, folks.

As for the neo-con apologists and cover-up artists referring to 9/11 truthers as "terrorists", this should absolutely come as no surprise. In fact it was the most predictable case of libel against us imaginable. Nobody should be surprised by it. No one. Our greatest defense against it is how utterly laughable it is.

Jesus Is an Anarchist

I'm also an anarchist, as is Jesus Christ. For the details on the latter part of the foregoing statement, see my below article:

"Jesus Is an Anarchist," James Redford, revised and expanded edition, June 1, 2006 (originally published December 19, 2001 at

For an analysis of the inherent incentive structure (i.e., the internal logic of the system) of government which makes it wholly unfit for protection of just property and insures that it will tend toward ever greater levels of usurpation and rapine, see my below article:

"Government Causes the Crime," James Redford, first published at circa October 2001

Below are some excellent articles concerning the nature of government, of liberty, and the free-market production of defense:

"The Anatomy of the State," Prof. Murray N. Rothbard, Rampart Journal of Individualist Thought, Vol. 1, No. 2 (Summer 1965), pp. 1-24. Reprinted in a collection of some of Rothbard's articles, Egalitarianism as a Revolt Against Nature and Other Essays (Washington, D.C.: Libertarian Review Press, 1974)

"Defense Services on the Free Market," Prof. Murray N. Rothbard, Chapter 1 from Power and Market: Government and the Economy (Kansas City: Sheed Andrews and McMeel, Inc., 1977; originally published 1970)

"The Private Production of Defense," Prof. Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 14, No. 1 (Winter 1998-1999), pp. 27-52

"Fallacies of the Public Goods Theory and the Production of Security," Prof. Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 9, No. 1 (Winter 1989), pp. 27-46

"Police, Courts, and Laws--On the Market," Chapter 29 from The Machinery of Freedom: Guide to a Radical Capitalism, Prof. David D. Friedman (La Salle, Illinois: Open Court Publishing Co., 1989; originally published 1971)

Concerning the ethics of human rights, the below book is the best book on the subject:

The Ethics of Liberty, Prof. Murray N. Rothbard (New York, New York: New York University Press, 1998; originally published 1982)

See also:

The Market for Liberty, Morris and Linda Tannehill (Lansing, Michigan: self-published, 1970)

"Terrorism is the health of the State."--James Redford, author of "Jesus Is an Anarchist," June 1, 2006

Jeremiah was a Bullfrog

The truthers is helping the Al Kidas!

Psy-Ops are the health of the State

Good to see the late Rothbard cited here, a great man who wasn't afraid to honestly confront evidence of government conspiracy.

Tragically, certain reputed followers of his -- notably Lew Rockwell and Justin Raimondo -- with major libertarian websites have outrageously failed the great man in this regard. Rockwell kills virtually any mention of 9/11 truth issues, and Raimondo has never once let a word escape on the subject at, while elsewhere bitterly condemning truthers as "nuts" and "utterly daffy."

(Of course in a larger sense all the libertarian establishment organs have failed on 9/11: Cato, LMI, Reason, Liberty, FEE, Future of Freedom, Independent Institute, Pacific Institute, Humane Studies, LP, you name it. They won't even discuss the subject. Yet the vast majority of libertarians I meet in the Ron Paul campaign are firmly in the truth camp. Go figure.)

Not to put too fine a point on it, but one small obstacle to libertarian acceptance of 9/11 truth developed early on. The free-market economist Morgan Reynolds, who had an appointed position in GWB's first term, noisily promoted space beam and phantom plane theories of 9/11 among Rothbardians, helping give 9/11 truth a bad reputation in those circles.

If the Truth is Terror

Then we are guilty as charged.

Truth is heresy to the Totalitarian State.

And the "innocent" are ALL LIARS.

Here is some Truth to put a Smile on Your Face.

Well 'You-Know-Who' is making a run for the White House with her cigar loving "husband".

Let's see how "innocent" they are shall we.

The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at

Look at these pictures

of Hillary, for some serious creepiness. Anyone that run against her, should print these up and pass them around.

see all forms of empire

see all forms of empire crumble?

and then what?

We start over? How?

I don't think you've thought through what you are saying. Seems to me a lot of people in this "movement" talk a good one, but that's where it ends.

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

corporate rule vs democracy?

"the movement represents the very antithesis of anarchism in that it is actively seeking to restore and protect our traditional form of government"

This is a problem I have with "THE Truth Movement" Although we all see the problem of 9/11 being a false flag staged operation,. just what to do about that seems to be a widly varing and partisan issue. That above quote is ONE idea of what should be done,. from my point ov view "our traditional form of government" has NEVER worked as proven by the situation we are now in,. Giveing power to others to govern over you is always a bad move.., and why do we need elected representatives now any way??? with the net we could easily have full debat and votes on the issues,.lets face it 90 percent of people wont care about most issues only those that do will be interested,. cut out the middle man and have a real democracy,. rule of the people. eleceted representatives where needed when the only way for people to debate the issues was face to face,. that is no longer the case! Of course this is an idealistic goal and as always the transition from the hellish system we find our selves in to something that actualy works is the real trick. The problem now is that unrestrained capitalism has created a world of enormous inequity,. corporations are too big, they control too much and there is so much vested interestes by those that profit unfairly that resistance to change will be a huge problem,. my only suggestion to everone is to pull back form the corporate control system and begin to re-localize just think about it how dependent on corporate food/hosing/energy are you? could you be cut off from these resources,. priced out of the food you get today? dependancy on a system that has to keep wars and slavery going to maintain is not good at all,. . simplifiy your life, get closer to the earth, grow your own food! Grow your own home straw-bale !!!

As far as the truth = terror meme I dont' think they will get much traction from that, unless they really do begin to stage crazy events,. and lie about them,. hummm guess they do that all the time so who knows,.

The movement...

is very anarchistic in many respects. It is decentralized, with cells spread out all over the planet. It is a model for leaderless resistance. It is non-coercive and non-authoritarian. It has a strong tendency towards mutual aid and free association. It could use a little more direct democracy to make it a true anarchistic model. However it is a rather inspiring example of modern day anarchistic resistance.

The problem is the widespread misunderstanding of the term anarchism. Because it seems so similar to the word anarchy, which is used as a synonym for chaos, the term anarchism is often understood to mean advocates for chaos, bomb throwers, people who want to tear down the system and leave nothing in it's place. In reality anarchism, a political theory, advocates a highly structured and organized social model, however one that is free of any unjustified authority, and one replete with direct democratic control over all facets of life. People living under an anarchist political system have many responsibilities, shared and individual, which they must take seriously. It is not a system where people just do whatever they want. There is a very clear structure and order under anarchism, though it looks nothing like our current system.

I am very worried about a false flag terror attack being used to round up truthers under the guise of them being violent anarchists and terrorist bomb throwers. I do not think that saying we are non-violent will do anything. If they come for us, saying "hey wait we are non-violent" will do nothing.

The truth is out there, in the minds of too many people in too many countries around the world. It's revelation cannot be stopped. However, it can be sped up or delayed. I fear another attack and clampdown would set back the movement many years or at the worst decades. Inevitably the truth will come out eventually. It is just a question of whether it takes 50 years, or we make it come out in the next five months before the next attack comes.

We Need to Pressure these Networks Directly

and hold them accountable for the licentious charges and inflammatory remarks made by the likes of O'Reilley and Beck. Since when is demanding truth a form of terror? (Except for the fact that they are terrified of the truth coming out!) Our numbers are already very good and these blowhards turn off people more than they connect with them, however we should try to add millions more to our ranks in these next few months.

One of the best ways is to place "Google... 9/11 Truth" posters and street signs all over our cities. This way it can direct millions of new people to our best websites. It isn't just a slogan that leaves them hanging. Does anyone remember the sign that Patrick put up a month or so ago with this slogan and the site? (At the time there was a problem with google searches, but now it's fine.)


I can't get the download to work. Does anyone have this or know how I can use this image?

My love for Bill

I was going to put Bill O'Reilly's picture at the bottom of my birdcage - but that would have been redundant.


"There are none so hoplessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free." (Goethe)



"Such shameful tactics are

"Such shameful tactics are not going to work because the horse has already bolted and the seeds of truth have been scattered over the globe by the winds of change."

I think they won't work just because these prats have overplayed their hand. Even people who don't agree with us think we have a right to free speech. And when I say "people", I mean real live people I've talked to, not talking heads on telly.

These shills are just making noise, any noise, to drown out reasoned debate--because they know they'd lose at that.

The Complicit media

have been saying this from day one as a way to both squelch dissent and to place the blame squarely on those dissenting WHEN their Neofascist masters attack us again.
The Media is truly the main culprit here as without them these slimy bastards could have never gotten away with all the crimes.

Make use of public access TV

The MSM are controlled, but there are still opportunities at the local level. Every city has a public access channel. It's not that hard to become a "producer" and start airing 9-11 videos. In fact it's easy.

One thing the Neo-Cons

One thing the Neo-Cons grossly under estimated or just mis-calculated completely is the internet. I just don't think they saw it coming as it is relatively a new medium...and they are a bunch of old whities:) Otherwise, they probably would have gotten away with it...which, I don't think they will in the end. This is a good fight!

? ? ?

This site was just down and this was here -

" has been suspended due to excessive resource usage.
The site will be down for some time until future decisions regarding the site are made. Posted on 11/1/2007 at 9:24pm EST"

Please explain.

Yeh, that was interesting...

Curious to know what that was about...technical problems?

Noticed that too

Got a huge fright actually when seeing that. I immedialty checked a bunch of other 9/11 sites to see if they were all shut down or something. Paranoid much?


VERYYY happy to see that it wasn't the case.

In related news, this article really disturbs me. It seems they're steppin' it up a notch. Be careful out there folks!

Canada Wants The Truth


Yea, I've been having problems getting onto this site recently, and once here, it seems to run far slower than it once did.
Anybody else noticing this?

Why was the site down ? Who did ?

Where's the explanation ? Hours later ?
What the story webmaster ?

Government Frame-Up Tactics Against Truth-Tellers

Below is documentation on frame-up incidents used against anti-New World Order activists, which clearly demonstrates how government and government-connected insider interests use manufactured frame-up tactics (such as frame-ups on terrorism and violent "anarchist" agitations) in order to smear and attempt to criminalize their peaceful opponents.

Government and its minions have been caught red-handed using this tactic over and over again, so the recent major media talking points that are going around equating 9/11 Truth members as being dangerous terrorists is evidence of the government's intent to stage false-flag terrorism (or other violent action) to be blamed on one or more 9/11 Truth movement members in order to smear and possibly even criminalize 9/11 Truth.

Also we need to point out the total illogic of the major media's recent talking points about 9/11 Truth members being tantamount to dangerous terrorists. Such assertions don't make any sense whatsoever. Think about it: someone who believes in 9/11 Truth maintains that governments (such as the U.S. government) stage terrorism and violence as pretexts in order to obtain more power, funding, control and evisceration of the masses' liberty; as well as being used to demonize their opponents. So someone who actually believes in 9/11 Truth would never conduct terrorism unless their intent was to make the U.S. government stronger while smearing 9/11 Truth members.

Obviously, if such an attack does come, then the point of it would be to strengthen the U.S. government while demonizing 9/11 Truth members.

It's vitally important that we get the word out on this before the government stages some violent event for said purposes.


On April 11, 2007 in front of the new World Trade Center Building 7 in the City of New York, one of Larry Silverstein's security guards threatened to frame Luke Rudkowski (founder of We Are Change) on false terrorism charges of having a bomb in his (Mr. Rudkowski's) backpack. Needless to say, such false terrorism frame-up threats are highly illegal and serious, yet the government hasn't even attempted to prosecute the security guard who made said threats, despite it having been clearly recorded on video.

You can see video of this incident below:

"NYC 911 Truth Jam (MP4 - High Quality)," longisland911truth, April 14, 2007

"NYC 911 Truth Jam (Better)," longisland911truth, April 13, 2007

"NYC 911 Truth Jam 4/11/07,", April 13, 2007

See also the below articles on this matter:

"'Activism is Terrorism': Well, According To The Police In NYC...," We Are Change, April 13, 2007

"'Activism is Terrorism' According To The Police In NYC," Somebigguy, April 13, 2007

"NY Police Report Bomb to Frame Activist as Terrorist: 'By the time the government finds out, you'll be in the hole thirty days' 9/11 Truther is Told By Officer Who Admits to False Accusation of Having a Bomb," Aaron Dykes & Alex Jones, Prison Planet, April 28, 2007


The police used rock-and-bottle-wielding undercover-cop agents provocateurs dressed up as so-called "anarchists" during the August 20, 2007 Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) North American Leaders' Summit in Montebello, Quebec, Canada, who were used in an attempt to smear the peaceful SPP protesters, and had they not been called out for their obvious state-agent provocateuring then it's likely certain that they would have engaged in bloodshed (since obviously they weren't wielding rocks and bottles while wearing masks in order to play Pat-a-Cake).

Below you can see a number of these undercover cops with their faces covered, one of whom is wielding a rock:

The rest of the police who were in on this set-up the whole time even staged a fake arrest of the undercover cops after they had been called out by the peaceful protesters (although the police were even quite reluctant to do that, despite the fact that these phoney "anarchists" were wielding rocks and bottles; it was only after considerable and vociferous complaining by the peaceful protesters that the police finally did so). In the below picture you can see one of the undercover cops during the mock arrest has an empty glass bottle in his back pocket (it appears it may be a Corona bottle):

For more such pictures, see:

Below is video of the incident:

"Stop SPP Protest - Union Leader stops provocateurs," CanadiansNanaimo, August 21, 2007

To crown all in this matter, after these agents provocateurs' were outted, Quebec Provincial police officer Marcel Savard and Public Security Minister Stockwell Day amazingly attempted to spin this event to the government's favor by perfidiously saying that their agents provocateurs were called out by the protesters because said agents were refusing to engage in violence! To be sure, the protesters who called out these treacherous thugs were perfectly peaceful and were clearly making the point at the time of the incident that they didn't want the violence the government's agents provocateurs were attempting to incite (as indeed the video evidence clearly shows). For that, see the below article:

"Quebec police defend officers' actions at summit,", August 24 2007

The police and military have been caught staging riots using their own agents provocateurs time and time again, such as with the 1999 World Trade Organization (WTO) in Seattle, the G8 summit in Genoa, Italy, etc. This is an ancient tactic of statecraft: stage violent acts so as to have a pretext to crack down on the rights of the masses and smear your opponents. Watch journalist Alex Jones's Police State II: The Takeover documentary where you can see how the police and military staged the 1999 WTO riots in Seattle from beginning to end.

Police State II: The Takeover (published 2000)

"Terrorism is the health of the State."--James Redford, author of "Jesus Is an Anarchist," June 1, 2006

The V-for-Vendetta theme protests planned by midwest activists

make a perfect opportunity for such false-flag actions to discredit truthers.

The fact that one of the organizers has made repeated immoderate comments
about "the scaffold" to his favorite evil-doers, has created a website advertising
the home addresses of same, and has spoken of the political utility of violence,
when linked top the vigilante theme inherent in the V-motif makes an invitation
to agents provocateur.

They don't need any excuse

all they need to do is make up any lie they wish to spin and hand it to their propaganda dept (MSM).

The more we can make it

The more we can make it difficult for them to discredit, the less it will happen.

When the efficiency of any effort is gone, the effort isn't worth it for them. This is common sense. Saying "they'll do it anyway" doesn't actually amount to much -- do what? When they have little or nothing to build on, the likelihood of them being exposed as lying, planting fake evidence, etc. puts much more risk in it for them. It's all a matter of percentages.

represents a racheting of tensions

It's a little chilling to hear the admitted ex-alcoholic manic-depressive Beck and the perv O'Reilly making inflammatory statements on otherwise politically correct mainstream media! O'Reilly's threat, "somebody is going to get hurt," proves bothersome!

Some believe HR 1955 the so-called "Thought Crime Bill," the most serious threat to our freedoms, yet!

Truth Revolution discusses the bill:

...don't believe them!

This means we are doing something right!

If the powers who least wish the truth of 9/11 to be known, after first ignoring and then mocking those who told the truth, are now demonizing truthers, then they are in effect picking a fight. That means we got their goat! They are swinging first and now our response will dictate their next move. The truth community should formally commit to non-violence IMHO. Either the elite are testing the waters to see how easy it would be to convince the public truthers are terrorists, or they are committed to convincing the public, which means their next step will be to step up the violence. State police actions against non-violent truth activists would, at the very least, persuade anybody who is still on the fence that something drastically wrong is going on. Most people still believe that truthers have the right of free speech.

National secrecy is a threat to human security.


On the other hand, if we force their hand, the best response of the elites to 911 truthers may turn out to be a self-inflicted wound, to strike at themselves and blame it on radicals among the truth community, just to take the attention away from themselves. Whoever is attacked in the next false-flag op may provide an important clue to the specific perpetrators or managers of 9/11.
National secrecy is a threat to human security.

That's a possibility, but an

That's a possibility, but an unlikely one I would think. The fact that so many people are now waking up to the very notion of 'false flag' terrorism is a defense itself, in our favor. And besides that, way too many folks would stop and say "wait a can call the 9/11 truthers nuts and weirdos but we REFUSE to believe that they are violent terrorists". I think another psy-op on U.S. soil that results in the deaths of more innocent Americans will be the final suicide death-blow of the globalist elite. This is very much like a game of chess, and I get the sense that they're unsure of their next hand. We're now approaching a VERY pivotal moment, it seems. With the next presidential election just 1 year away, things should be starting to get very interesting pretty soon.

Gambling with people's lives

Whether the plutocrats decide to commit a new false flag op despite the risks of being found out, or decide to play it cool instead and try to escape into secrecy, either way it is a gamble. Will the public wake up? That is not certain. It is uncertain whether they will wake up, with or without a false flag operation. The perpetrators of 9/11, the global elites who command the world's resources, have already shown a willingness to kill their own people, and foreign people, for the sake of profit. If they must declare martial law in the US so that they can kill widespread dissidence, they may do it. They might figure it's too late to conceal the truth, and so commit a preemptive strike against the future rebellion. They might even figure they are in this too deep already, they have to go all the way or risk everything they have strived for. It is hard to tell whether they are really desperate or whether there is a contest going on in the very highest echelons, to see which faction will goad the other into hostility first. Then, the other factions can claim innocence if their collective plot is discovered.

National secrecy is a threat to human security.

Be ready for an attempted discrediting

I only wish more 9/11 truthers would study the Oklahoma City bombing. This was an operation of the Clinton administration aimed at countering its bad publicity generated by the earlier Waco massacre and the related rising (and generally completely peaceful) militia movement.

A couple of militia members/anti-Waco massacre activists (most famously Timothy McVeigh) were recruited to be patsies by agents provocateurs in the administration (apparently FBI agents). The patsies were lured into avenging the Waco victims by blowing up a truck loaded with explosives set off near the Murrah Federal Office Building. The explosives were inadequate and the proximity to the building was too distant to damage the building much, but what the patsies and the public alike didn't realize was that massive bombs had been planted in the building by the administration to go off simultaneously.

The Oklahoma City bombing was a spectacular public relations success for the Clinton administration. Its Waco massacre critics and the militia movement were badly demoralized and widely seen as discredited.

It shouldn't surprise us if the Bush administration attempts to emulate that kind of success. Real or faux patsies may be recruited to attempt violent actions -- the scope of those violent actions massively "enhanced" by inside operators.

a duplicated post removed, sorry.


... and then they attack us.

Umm... Bill O'Reilly statements are starting to scare me. He says violence is inevitable and we (Gandi) says "... and then they attack us."

Should we get armed now or what?

This is exactly what I and

This is exactly what I and loads of others think also, AJ is bang on;

O'REILLY: “Every American should condemn these people and I will tell you, I’m going to make this prediction, if they’re not rained in by the authorities, and they should be… Somebody’s going to get hurt”.

Just to put this into perspective O'Reilly's clairvoyance and bid to be the next Nostradamus didn't start with the above comment;

O'REILLY: "Now let me make a prediction here. Driven by crazy websites, the far left in this country is so out-of-control that somebody's going to get hurt. No American has a right to intrude on church services, television programs, or any other private gathering. If authorities don't wise up fast, bad things are going to happen. Wait and see."

CNN's Glenn Beck and Dave Nalle from "Blog critics" have also been gifted with crystal ball gazing Sage like powers of divination;

Glenn Beck: This is the kind of group that ‘a Timothy McVeigh’ would come from.”

Dave Nalle from "Blog critics": "It's easy to laugh at the conspiracists, but it's a grim truth that someone protesting Bill Maher this week might be the next Timothy MacVeigh or Ted Kasinski a few frustrated and ignored years down the road."

I've already said this but it's worth repeating, I really don't like this new "9/11 Truth = Terrorism" rhetoric suddenly being spewed by the shills. It started with this individual Dave Nalle from "Blog critics", and I thought that was just some absurd one off garbage. But now it seems to have found its way onto the autocues of Glenn Beck and O'Reilly, with O'Reilly even making "predictions" about it. I find this slanderous against the Movement in the least (considering we're a Peace Movement!!) and at most potentially quite disturbing if this actually runs deeper within the criminal apparatus of the system.

One solution to this could be to make it firmly known that Gandhi launched his non-violent resistance movement on 9/11 1906, and that the 9/11 Truth Movement is by extension Gandhi's Movement! I think this is an incredibly powerful concept that the movement should absolutely recognize and embrace.

9/11 1906 vs 9/11 2001 A Revelation: Commemoration event of September 11, 1906, the Birth of Satyagraha in light of September 11, 2001

September 11, 2006 is the fifth anniversary of the terrorist attacks on the U.S. But it is also the 100th anniversary of the beginning of Gandhi’s first non-violent campaign. Mahatma Gandhi launched his first campaign of non-violent direct action in South Africa on September 11, 1906.

See also: Bill O'Reilly: Rosie is Blamed For More Far-Left Lunacy

Truth and Reconciliation Commission

People would be more willing and less fearful of adopting the views of 911 Truth activists if they felt they were calling for forgiveness rather than retribution and punishment.

The peace movement should call for granting amnesty from prosecution and guarantee of an ample, lifetime pension to anyone who agrees to testify on their roles in the events of 9/11, extending this offer to any members of the US government, foreign governments and/or terrorist groups involved in the planning or execution of the attacks of that day.

Additionally, individuals should step forward and volunteer to spend time working with those who give testimony on crimes they have committed so that they might be reintegrated into society.

Instead of executing Nazi war criminals we should have devoted all the human resources available to us to rehabilitating them, awakening in them awareness of the nature of their actions so that they could have come to understand that they must make amends. If they had remained alive they would have been a living testament to the transformative powers of forgiveness.

Historians and psychologists especially should come out in favor of preserving invaluable study material in the form of the opportunity to converse with the authors of unfortunate historical deeds.

A declaration of willingness to forgive would force the government's hand. If it were to arrest or make attempts to discredit someone calling for 911 truth plus forgiveness, that would be a tacit acknowledgement by the government of its complicity in the 9/11 attacks. Imagine the impact of footage on YouTube of police arresting demonstrators carrying signs reading: "I forgive you George Bush for 9/11 . Perhaps even the passively complicit mainstream media could be convinced to show someone carrying a sign calling for amnesty for the perpetrators of 9/11.

If we consider ourselves morally superior to the government, we should propose actions and attitudes that are more humanitarian with respect to them than their actions have been with respect to us.

I strongly suspect that the white apartheid government in South Africa did not agree to fair elections until assured that they would not be executed or imprisoned by the black majority government when it came to power.

In "The Art of War", Sun Tzu said never to surround an enemy. If you do not leave him an out, he will fight to the last man

Finally, these ideas do not depend on the media for their dissemination. If you can convince six friends of the merit of these ideas and get them to tell six of their own friends tomorrow, each of whom tells six of their friends the next day, and so on, then the ideas will reach every person in the world in two weeks by word of mouth alone (do the math).

(to see an interesting discussion of these ideas, please see


Yes! This is the best I have heard so far. We must give up on the notion of getting even with the perps of 9/11. There is no way we could get even with them. Over roughly the last 100 years, a subculture of perhaps hundreds or thousands have murdered perhaps MILLIONS or BILLIONS of people! 9/11 is but one step in the series of criminal acts. The murders were premeditated and tacitly accepted by society for the purpose of perpetuating the human race. The people who knew what they were doing when the Twin Towers were destroyed are but the tip of the social iceberg that demolished those towers. A widespread following of people in the media and in the general public are now defending the perpetrators, whether knowingly or not. They will not be willing to accept the truth unless their rulers apologize personally, or at least admit it publicly. The question is just how widespread is their following and conversely, how widespread are their dissidents?
National secrecy is a threat to human security.

I could not disagree more

These lying ass bastards need to be drug through the public square and drawn and quartered as far I'm concerned.
Then clean up the whole damn system to try an make sure it doesn't happen again anytime soon.

A suggestion like this is akin to asking a snake to say he is sorry for biting you, not going to happen in a million years not to mention human nature whether we like it not reacts more favorably to violent overthrow than it does anything else. History proves this rather convincingly.

Calling this terrorism

is really astonishing.
First conspiracy-theorists, then conspiracy-nuts and now this!

When in reality we are just plot-disrupters wanting only justice!
And that bothers the unjust plotters.

Maybe their upped rhetoric is due to threats from our side

Some idiot created a website called to publish home
addresses of "the elite".

If someone had created such a website to publicize the home addresses
of 9/11 activists, we would regard that as a threat.

If people started congregating outside the homes of 9/11 activists wearing
masks and cloaks and wigs, we would regard that as a threat.

"Some idiot created a

"Some idiot created a website called to publish home
addresses of "the elite"

Well, that "idiot" could very well be working FOR the elite. Call it False Flag "internet tagging". Accuse the truthers of posting home addresses of the elite when it's in fact an elite operation doing it in order to say "See, these truth-nuts may pose a threat to us since they're actually listing our home addresses online for all the world to see".

It's hard to tell how far down the rabbit hole descends.

"Some idiot" = Kevin Barrett


Addresses are not idiotic

Sorry, but you have not proven that taking 9/11 Truth to the homes of responsible parties is a bad idea. The amount of press these types of harassment tatics are getting indicates you may be very wrong here. Furthermore, we want responsible parties and their families to feel the potential of heat. Energy is needed for change.

U.S. | Police State and Prisons (1984 Arrives in 2007')

U.S. | Police State and Prisons
House Passes Thought Crime Prevention Bill
by Jefferson (A)bbey
Thursday Oct 25th, 2007 3:51 PM

The U.S. House of Representatives recently passed HR 1955 titled the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007. This bill is one of the most blatant attacks against the Constitution yet and actually defines thought crimes as homegrown terrorism.


Lee Rogers
Rogue Government
October 25, 2007

The U.S. House of Representatives recently passed HR 1955 titled the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007. This bill is one of the most blatant attacks against the Constitution yet and actually defines thought crimes as homegrown terrorism. If passed into law, it will also establish a commission and a Center of Excellence to study and defeat so called thought criminals. Unlike previous anti-terror legislation, this bill specifically targets the civilian population of the United States and uses vague language to define homegrown terrorism. Amazingly, 404 of our elected representatives from both the Democrat and Republican parties voted in favor of this bill. There is little doubt that this bill is specifically targeting the growing patriot community that is demanding the restoration of the Constitution. First let’s take a look at the definitions of violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism as defined in Section 899A of the bill.

The definition of violent radicalization uses vague language to define this term of promoting any belief system that the government considers to be an extremist agenda. Since the bill doesn’t specifically define what an extremist belief system is, it is entirely up to the interpretation of the government. Considering how much the government has done to destroy the Constitution they could even define Ron Paul supporters as promoting an extremist belief system. Literally, the government according to this definition can define whatever they want as an extremist belief system. Essentially they have defined violent radicalization as thought crime. The definition as defined in the bill is shown below.

(2) VIOLENT RADICALIZATION- The term violent radicalization’ means the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change.

The definition of homegrown terrorism uses equally vague language to further define thought crime. The bill includes the planned use of force or violence as homegrown terrorism which could be interpreted as thinking about using force or violence. Not only that but the definition is so vaguely defined, that petty crimes could even fall into the category of homegrown terrorism. The definition as defined in the bill is shown below.

(3) HOMEGROWN TERRORISM- The term homegrown terrorism’ means the use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within the United States or any possession of the United States to intimidate or coerce the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.

Section 899B of the bill goes over the findings of Congress as it pertains to homegrown terrorism. Particularly alarming is that the bill mentions the Internet as a main source for terrorist propaganda. The bill even mentions streams in obvious reference to many of the patriot and pro-constitution Internet radio networks that have been formed. It also mentions that homegrown terrorists span all ages and races indicating that the Congress is stating that everyone is a potential terrorist. Even worse is that Congress states in their findings that they should look at draconian police states like Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom as models to defeat homegrown terrorists. Literally, these findings of Congress fall right in line with the growing patriot community.

The biggest joke of all is that this section also says that any measure to prevent violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism should not violate the constitutional rights of citizens. However, the definition of violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism as they are defined in section 899A are themselves unconstitutional. The Constitution does not allow the government to arrest people for thought crimes, so any promises not to violate the constitutional rights of citizens are already broken by their own definitions.


The Congress finds the following:

(1) The development and implementation of methods and processes that can be utilized to prevent violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in the United States is critical to combating domestic terrorism.

(2) The promotion of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence exists in the United States and poses a threat to homeland security.

(3) The Internet has aided in facilitating violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process in the United States by providing access to broad and constant streams of terrorist-related propaganda to United States citizens.

(4) While the United States must continue its vigilant efforts to combat international terrorism, it must also strengthen efforts to combat the threat posed by homegrown terrorists based and operating within the United States.

(5) Understanding the motivational factors that lead to violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence is a vital step toward eradicating these threats in the United States.

(6) The potential rise of self radicalized, unaffiliated terrorists domestically cannot be easily prevented through traditional Federal intelligence or law enforcement efforts, and requires the incorporation of State and local solutions.

(7) Individuals prone to violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence span all races, ethnicities, and religious beliefs, and individuals should not be targeted based solely on race, ethnicity, or religion.

(8) Any measure taken to prevent violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence and homegrown terrorism in the United States should not violate the constitutional rights, civil rights and civil liberties of United States citizens and lawful permanent residents.

(9) Certain governments, including the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia have significant experience with homegrown terrorism and the United States can benefit from lessons learned by those nations.

Section 899C calls for a commission on the prevention of violent radicalization and ideologically based violence. The commission will consist of ten members appointed by various individuals that hold different positions in government. Essentially, this is a commission that will examine and report on how they are going to deal with violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism. So basically, the commission is being formed specifically on how to deal with thought criminals in the United States. The bill requires that the commission submit their final report 18 months following the commission’s first meeting as well as submit interim reports every 6 months leading up to the final report. Below is the bill’s defined purpose of the commission. Amazingly they even define one of the purposes of the commission to determine the causes of lone wolf violent radicalization.

(b) Purpose- The purposes of the Commission are the following:

(1) Examine and report upon the facts and causes of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in the United States, including United States connections to non-United States persons and networks, violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in prison, individual or lone wolf’ violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence, and other faces of the phenomena of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence that the Commission considers important.

(2) Build upon and bring together the work of other entities and avoid unnecessary duplication, by reviewing the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of–

(A) the Center of Excellence established or designated under section 899D, and other academic work, as appropriate;

(B) Federal, State, local, or tribal studies of, reviews of, and experiences with violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence; and

(C) foreign government studies of, reviews of, and experiences with violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence.

Section 899D of the bill establishes a Center of Excellence for the Study of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism in the United States. Essentially, this will be a Department of Homeland Security affiliated institution that will study and determine how to defeat thought criminals.

Section 899E of the bill discusses how the government is going to defeat violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism through international cooperation. As stated in the findings section earlier in the legislation, they will unquestionably seek the advice of countries with draconian police states like the United Kingdom to determine how to deal with this growing threat of thought crime.

Possibly the most ridiculous section of the bill is Section 899F which states how they plan on protecting civil rights and civil liberties while preventing ideologically based violence and homegrown terrorism. Here is what the section says.


(a) In General- The Department of Homeland Security’s efforts to prevent ideologically-based violence and homegrown terrorism as described herein shall not violate the constitutional rights, civil rights, and civil liberties of United States citizens and lawful permanent residents.

(b) Commitment to Racial Neutrality- The Secretary shall ensure that the activities and operations of the entities created by this subtitle are in compliance with the Department of Homeland Security’s commitment to racial neutrality.

(c) Auditing Mechanism- The Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Officer of the Department of Homeland Security will develop and implement an auditing mechanism to ensure that compliance with this subtitle does not result in a disproportionate impact, without a rational basis, on any particular race, ethnicity, or religion and include the results of its audit in its annual report to Congress required under section 705.’.

(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of contents in section 1(b) of such Act is amended by inserting at the end of the items relating to title VIII the following:

It states in the first subsection that in general the efforts to defeat thought crime shall not violate the constitutional rights, civil rights and civil liberties of the United States citizens and lawful permanent residents. How does this protect constitutional rights if they use vague language such as in general that prefaces the statement? This means that the Department of Homeland Security does not have to abide by the Constitution in their attempts to prevent so called homegrown terrorism.

This bill is completely insane. It literally allows the government to define any and all crimes including thought crime as violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism. Obviously, this legislation is unconstitutional on a number of levels and it is clear that all 404 representatives who voted in favor of this bill are traitors and should be removed from office immediately. The treason spans both political parties and it shows us all that there is no difference between them. The bill will go on to the Senate and will likely be passed and signed into the law by George W. Bush. Considering that draconian legislation like the Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act have already been passed, there seems little question that this one will get passed as well. This is more proof that our country has been completely sold out by a group of traitors at all levels of government.
© 2000–2007 San Francisco Bay Area Independent Media Center. Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by the SF Bay Area IMC. Disclaimer | Privacy | Contact