9/11 Truth Movement Should Support Cynthia McKinney for President!
Many people in the 9/11 Truth Movement have understandably been energized by the Ron Paul campaign for President. It was indeed heartening to see a contender for the Republican Party nomination who was supportive of the call for a new, genuine, thorough and comprehensive investigation of 9/11.
However, now that that the Republican race is all but over, and Mr. Paul has indicated that he will not seek to run as an independent, I ask those of you in the Movement (who have not already done so) to please consider lending your financial and volunteer support to former Georgia Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, who is seeking the Green Party nomination for President of the United States.
Whereas Ron Paul adopted a strategy of being coy about his support for the 9/11 Truth Movement, Cynthia McKinney has boldly and openly supported the 9/11 Truth Movement, serving as a Commissioner in the Citizens' Commission on 9/11. She was among 100 prominent Americans and 40 family members of those killed on 9/11 who signed the 9/11 Truth Movement statement, calling for new investigations of the numerous unexplained aspects of the 9/11 events. She took a lot of flak for speaking truth to power -- but she didn't back down.
Cynthia has also been a leading critic of the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq, calling for an immediate withdrawal of U.S. forces. She has not only been a leading dissenting voice in Congress, she has been an actual peace activist. And she has demanded the truth of federal government activities in other areas, demanding an accounting of missing Pentagon funds and introducing the "MLK Records Act," which would release the sealed files concerning the 1968 assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. And where most Democrats in Congress shied away from impeaching our criminal president, McKinney introduced a resolution to impeach Bush, Cheney and Condoleeza Rice.
Right now the McKinney for President, Power to the People Campaign needs funds to help Cynthia campaign and get her message out. The campaign is well on its way but could use a boost from 9/11 Truth activists. You can donate online, at www.runcynthiarun.org, or send a check Power to the People Committee, Cynthia McKinney for President; Joan Christian, Treasurer; P.O. Box 311759;Atlanta Georgia 31131-1759. For FEC purposes, please include your name, address, occupation and employer with your contribution.
I realize that some folks who have been enamored by Ron Paul's libertarian philosophy on economic issues may disagree with the Green Party's views on such issues. The Green Party believes that there is an appropriate role for the public sector in our economic life. However, like Paul and the Libertarians, we oppose the military industrial complex and the huge waste of public money and resources on corporate welfare, and we oppose the current ruling elite's domineering, military interventionist foreign policy. These are surely the biggest single categories of wasteful and harmful government spending. And whatever our respectful disagreements may be on some issues, we are in agreement on the central demands of the 9/11 Truth Movement. Good luck getting any help on that from Clinton, Obama or McCain!
The Green Party is a party of principle that refuses corporate campaign contributions and seeks to realize America's unfulfilled promise of government of, by and for the people -- not government of the privileged, by the corporations and for the highest bidder. It is a viable, progressive populist party. We have worked hard for years to build up this party and now present the best chance for breaking up the two-party duopoly in the U.S. to come along in many years. We have an established ballot line in 22 states -- and with a little help from our friends, we can get all 50 by Election Day.
When we are able to get the word out about what we stand for, and run an effective campaign, voters will respond and vote Green. I know this from personal experience. In 2006, I ran for Governor of the State of Illinois, and received over 360,000 votes, about 10.5 percent of the total, the highest for a "third" party in Illinois in decades. With help from this movement, Cynthia McKinney can achieve a comparable result nationally -- and perhaps more! At any rate, her campaign will help lay the groundwork for future successes, and help our other candidates, many of whom are also supporters of 9/11 Truth, running for offices at all levels of government.
Please support the 9/11 Truth Movement -- and your own interest as an American who supports true representative democracy -- on the political field. Please support the McKinney for President, Power to the People Campaign!
Rich Whitney
2006 Green Party Candidate for Governor of Illinois
Supporter of 9/11 Truth
- rwhitneyIL's blog
- Login to post comments
Agreed
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it
She........
would get my vote. I would like to see Jesse Ventura in the race as well.
I would support McKinney,
I would support McKinney, but agree with your points.
"National health care" is in the Constitution no more than torture is.
Why the negative ratings?
The man speaks the truth!
Honest Broker
Honest Broker
I am an avid Ron Paul supporter and will be voting for him even if I have to write in his name. But I promote all of the non establishment candidates in all of my campaign discussions, which I have often. I put forth my Constitutional and Conservative ideas (small government, fiscal responsibility, non interventionist foreign policy) as the best plan for the US, and Ron Paul is the man to carry out this agenda. But to be fair, Liberals most certainly are some of my fellow countrymen, so I feel compelled to inform them of the real liberal choices. McKinney, Gravel, and even Nader represent the real liberals running and Ron Paul represents the real Republican running; this is the real presidential race. In the USA, the best and most popular ideals decided by We the People should lead the way. I think it is wrong to force my ideas onto others, they should be recognized for their own merit. I don't think liberals are the best choice, however, knowing they are not part of the corrupt establishment (save for Nader perhaps), I could live with it knowing that we have at least an honest president who represents the people. Of the real liberal choices, by far, Cynthia McKinney is the best choice if only for her courage. McKinney solidified her status as American hero the day she managed to confront and get Rumsfeld recorded in the Congressional record that the Pentagon is missing 2.3 trillion dollars. She put her neck on the chopping block for our country. Oh yeah, she also rocks it with 911 Truth. That is why she is my favorite liberal.
It's the Establishment, Stupid
To me...
This is a no-brainer. She openly talks about 9/11 Truth at every opportunity.
Why isn't Dick Cheney in prison?
A McKinney-Ventura Ticket
A McKinney-Ventura Ticket would be very very interesting.
:)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it
Ventura is a very cool guy
The man speaks his mind. However, his politics are not rooted on any philosophical principle.
In addition, he doesn't have any background in economics.
Economics?
So, which candidate (or past president for that matter) has ever had a background in economics?
And what philosophical principle are you hoping for? Personally, I would just like a candidate that wasn't evil!
Cynthia has my vote if I have to write her in with my kids crayon!
Philosphical principle
1. The non-aggression principle (NAP). It's the foundation of the libertarian philosophy.
The principle is that the initiation of violence or coercion on another individual is immoral.
Economics and the presidency
Ronald Reagan had a decent background in economics. Possibly some of the early presidents did as well (maybe Jefferson and Jackson? I'd have to research that though). However it must be noted that Reagan was an abysmal failure to implement his economic knowledge.
How about this guy?
How about his "background" in economics.?
At least Ventura has a mind to speak of.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it
Bush had an Economic
Bush had an Economic background. You have missed the point Patrick. She would still do less harm to the economy than McCain, Clinton or Obama. Her economic plan would not be aligned with big business, lobbying or the Fed. The only way that a 9/11 truth activist could oppose her as a viable candidate is if they were afraid of her personal safety and the extreeme likelyhood of an assassination. This at least has merrit and honesty (though utterly dire).She has given so much for her constituents and for the rights of Americans. As for Jessie, he survived as Govenor of Minnesota without causing an economic collapse. Sometimes when I hear these trivial objections, I really become disheartend at how easily this movement can be divided. Changing the system is up to you. Don't vote for the best of the two evils. Vote for the best person, period. Otherwise you will perpetuate this sad system forever.
Just my thoughts.
Excellent!
See the post below on Obama's phone manners.
I wonder if he is planning to take international calls that way,
Great for Foreign Policy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it
The importance of economics
1. Economics is trivial? I'm sure I can you get to modify your views. Just think about this:
A government operating on sound economic principles, for starters would have:
a) no central bank (money would be left to the market)
b) no price controls
c) no subsidies
d) no tariffs
2. If Bush has an background in economics, I barely see any glimpses of it. Or it could be that it's the Keynesian (replete of fallacies) branch...
I highly recommend that you read this book:
BAD SAMARITANS: The Myth Of Free Trade And The Secret History Of Capitalism by Ha-Joon Chang.
I'll be very interested to read what you have to say about it.
I hope that you and yours are well.
The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.
Thanks.
I like the part title "the myth of free trade." There sure as hell isn't (despite what the politicians say)!
However, wait a minute, I'm looking at the reviews on Amazon--this does not look like my cup on tea:
The author comes down solidly in favor of protectionism, foreign investment controls, state-owned enterprises, avoidance of privatization, not allowing patents to clash with the public interest, the need to defy the marketplace and respect the role of manufacturing, and the influence of culture (and changing the culture through government direction).
Yikes, talk about a lot of coercion!
I won't be able to read it. Books like this, that is written by a conservative or liberal, are outdated.
Both of those ideologies are bankrupt.
You're not going to let Amazon do your thinking for you,
are you patrick?
You never know, you may just learn something or at the very least sharpen your own thinking and arguments.
I find most economic theory to have been so perverted by politics, especially deep politics, that it is essentially useless for creating a sustainable world in which humanity can evolve peacefully.
It's only a book, brother.
The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.
"Free Trade"
No central bank is all well and good.
However, the other "free trade" policies amount to being at the mercy of whomever has the most money.
The atmosphere you're describing is the one that brought us Rockefeller, Morgan and the other robber barons and stifled millions in poverty.
We can have a "free market" in bagels or other non-essential goods because you can always withdraw your participation when the tide is against you, but when it comes to energy, healthcare, or other essential goods and services, how does it serve humanity to be at the mercy of the ruthless? A real democracy would mean that our votes would decide where protectionism protects us and where tariffs limit our opportunities. But this flat Earth economic globalism is spreading nothing around the world faster than poverty and misery. By design.
"The Shock Doctrine" is the book you should read. It's a history of Friedmanism. Read it before it becomes the story you're drowning in.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
~George Orwell
double post
www.mises.org
Gov. Ventura is a libertarian, btw.
Small "L" libertarian, that is.
You may want to read his new book, Don't Start The Revolution Without Me!, before you mis-characterize his political philosophy.
While the book needs another round of editing, it is a very good read and gives one a true sense of Gov. Ventura's humanity, political philosophy and love of his native state and country.
The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.
You know what, he is actually more libertarian
that I had realized (http://www.reason.com/news/show/30973.html).
I didn't know what he considers himself to be one. Some of the things he said while (ie. war on drugs) during the interviews of promoting his new book, weren't consistent to the philosophy. That was what set off my alarm!
But good to see that he is on the path!
Thanks LeftWright
There are many paths to the same destination,
my friend.
Do not let orthodoxy blind you to diversity.
Gov. Ventura may yet play a key role in the future of our republic. The man cares deeply about our republic and has great courage.
Btw, you're very welcome.
Cheers!
The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.
McKinney - Ventura
THAT would get coverage!
I Disagree
though i absolutely agree with you that cynthia mckinney is the most qualified candidate for 9/11 truthers to choose, you would end up dividing 9/11 truth as this question of 3rd party candidates running as spoilers has divided progressive voters. sure, one side says they are taking the high road, vote your conscience.., but the other side, which i am on, think, the system is f_cked and we need baby steps to begin reclaiming our democracy that has been hijacked. both sides have good points.. but the result is weakening each, the divide and conquer role of the situation plays in again.. Whereas, and i wrote this to cynthia, if we can make only convince a majority of legislatures to adopt IRV instant run-off voting, then we can have a cake and eat it too.. meaning.. we vote our conscience and if cythia does not win, i get my second or third option to count.. so it destroys the 3rd party spoiler, but also it would trascend the one-2-party system. But now we are in a crisis, and a baby step with someone like obama, is better than getting stuck going into a deeper ditch with mccain or hillary. i would rather 9/11 truth steer away from such debates that would divide our resolve.
A much more uniting effort would to have a vote on national election day for a new 9/11 investigation. this is what www.nyc911initiative.org is all about. that vote could produce a mandate for whoever is the next president, and the coalition with fire fighters and police forces should be key in uniting all americans to continue demanding or enforcing ourselves a full investigation and report. to me.. this is the direct route.. of course.. if i thought we had a half a chance of getting cynthia elected next fall, i would only be encouraging you..
note more on this issue i posted at Flyby News
Campaigns for Reclaiming a Lost USA Democracy,
Also more ideas on actions to take at the forum for the Week Of Truth
http://weekoftruth.org/forum/
jonathan
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
News fit to transmit in the post Cassini flyby era
<>~<>~<>~ www.FlybyNews.com ~<>~<>~<>
~~~ for life's survival in the 21st Century ~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Since...
The current system will never allow a viable third party candidate (such as Cynthia McKinney or Ron Paul) to be elected, shouldn't the 9/11 Truth Movement support the candidate that supports 9/11 Truth? The candidate that will openly promote 9/11 Truth at every opportunity? By the way, I do think the discussion itself is divisive and time consuming... I've said before that I am going to vote for Cynthia McKinney because that is what my mind, and my heart tell me to do. I've also said that I'm not going to waste time promoting her because she has no chance of winning, and am going to continue focusing on 9/11 Truth. However, if she asks for help, it would be hard for me to say no. Maybe supporting Cynthia, and promoting Cynthia is "focusing on 9/11 Truth"? I dunno.
Why isn't Dick Cheney in prison?
Yes.
The Victory.
Is in Hearts and Minds.
Not in rigged elections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it
I'm sorry
but I have to disagree with your notion that Obama is a move in the right direction. One of my biggest reasons for saying so is Obama's earlier comments on invading Pakistan to get Osama bin Laden. IMHO, any candidate who would say this has an innate misunderstanding of the proper role of presidential power, and would be easily manipulated into its misuse, as George W. Bush was. Remember, Bush was not always the warmongering neocon that he is now. He was viewed as basically a moderate Republican when he went into office, the sort of guy who would cut taxes, not look for wars, and not get too caught up in the religious right's games, even though he himself was a Christian believer.
If I had to pick from the three major candidates right now, I would probably go for Hilary, because while she is disagreeable to say the least, I don't see her getting overly manipulated or taking things too far past a certain point. She's too smart and too experienced for that. With McCain, there is nothing to manipulate, as he is an avid warmonger himself.
Anyway, we could go back and forth on that all day, and I could easily be wrong on that one. Even though I don't like her nearly as much as I do Ron Paul (or for that matter Dennis Kucinich or Mike Gravel), I could see myself voting for Cynthia McKinney as a thank-you for her stand on 9/11 Truth, as well as being someone who, right or wrong, is genuinely outside the Establishment.
without paper ballots and transparent counting
elections don't really mean anything, but i think Citizens should still go out and vote their conscience as a testimony.
With the way technology and the 9/11 truth movement is evolving, i wouldn't be surprised at all if both the Dem and the Rep become unelectable due to exposure of conflicts of interest, corruption or media distortion- especially if the Dem is Clinton, but anyone who takes millions from oil, financial, insurance and other corporate interests is a Republocrat and untrustworthy, imho- check WhiteHouseForSale.org and OpenSecrets.org
Anyway, we shall see, it's 6 mo. to the election- whatever issues there may be with McKinney, she is less evil than any of the Dem or Rep options left.
I'm hoping some other indy and 3rd party candidates make a name for themselves standing up for truth and accountability in government, especially for 9/11
The Top 40
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041221155307646
I'm voting for her as a way
I'm voting for her as a way to express my discontent with the establishment candidates, who are not out for your interests.
I am realistic, however, in her inability to actually win. That's not the point.
/////////////////////
http://www.swatcash.com/dhs
Presidential Debate
I read that Hillary wants an unmoderated debate with Obama.
If she wanted a true debate, she would include Nader and McKinney.
But she won't, because she doesn't.
I'll be voting for Cynthia McKinney in Nov.
A bit off topic....I got this email from a friend:
Listen to this shit! My nephew who has been in the Army for 2 years was told
that his unit was being extended until 2013 and they were going to be deployed
SOMEWHERE for 2 years......IRAN!
I agree wholeheartedly
A lot of my friends are still going to write in Ron Paul's name at election time to try to make a statement. But I don't understand how anyone could write in Ron Paul's name when there is an actual truther running. I fully support Cynthia for President. The last time I saw her spoke she said the 9/11 truth movement and wearechange are two of the most important movements happening in the country right now.
"I will not withdraw from this war even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me." -George W. Bush
Understandably so
The man is a constant breath of fresh air. But I've also admired Ms MicKinney for a long time, and since I wont see his name on the ballot, if Cynthia is there I could see voting for her. But I wouldnt mind throwing some money her way either...
Libertarian candidates Steve
Libertarian candidates Steve Kubby and Dr. Mary Ruwart also support 9/11 Truth.
"The number of people that can reason well is much smaller than those that can reason badly.
If reasoning were like hauling rocks, then several reasoners might be better than one.
But reasoning isn't like hauling rocks, it's like, it's like racing,
er, this is a bad thing? or
er, this is a bad thing? or do we have trolls?
"While I’m on the record
"While I’m on the record for disagreeing with people within the “Truth Movement” on some issues, it’s also becoming apparent that they represent a large enough block of voters for third party candidates to consider taking seriously."
Truthers for McKinney
http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/04/27/truthers-for-mckinney/#comments
I would
vote for her in a heart-beat even though she has no chance to win. At least if she ran 9/11 truth would get air time. I think Jessie would be an even better choice. I think more people would listen to him plus who has the balls to screw around with him? He would eat up his competition.
Since we are talking about Presidential candidates
Here is a RED FLAG!
Obama: I've learned an immense amount from Dr. Brzezinski
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASlETEx0T-I&feature=related
Apparently Dr Z. B. has not taught him how to hold a phone properly.
Another "Expert" in Economics, I presume.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it
Just musing
Wouldn't it be interesting, if whoever wins the presidential election gets a total of 11 votes, so the totals (including write-ins) would look like this (for example):
Winner (substitute anyone below): 11
McCain:8
Obama 9
Clinton 6
McKinney 9
Nader 7
Paul 10
LaRouche 6
Gravel 8
Kucinich 10
Keyes 7
Now, can you imagine the "winner" - having garnered a total of 11 votes, claiming to "have a mandate?" The president would then be reduced to his/her proper role of seeing that the laws - made by Congress - are "faithfully executed," --- rather than being "the decider" of which nation to invade next, or who is an enemy combattant to be tortured etc. etc. etc.
We give far, far, far too much power to the president. He/she is just another very fallible human being. Why do millions and millions of people select one person, to have his/her "finger on the button?" Why have we created "the button" in the first place? This is cleary an insane way for a species to organize itself.
Is realizing that our species is insane, "unrealistic" or "impractical?" Or is it the essence of reasonableness and practicality to face just how far over the edge we, as a species have gone?
FYI The Constitution Party
FYI
The Constitution Party nominee Chuck Baldwin also supports 9/11 Truth.
It would be nice if all three major third parties has candidates who supported 9/11 Truth.
It could happen.
We should all support Cynthia
I had been intending to wrote a similar blog for some time. cynthia is full on for a new investigation into 9/11. She came over to the UK last year to highlight 9/11 specifically. Watch American blackout to see how she exposed the stolen elections. this woman is a true legend!!!!!!!!! Lets not forget her grilling of rumsfeld
If Cynthia can get 5% of the vote for President then the 2 party system is finished!!!!! Having spent time with Cynthia I can honestly say I've never met a more inspirational and honest person.
Peace, love and truth
Andy
Let's keep 9/11 truth non-partisan
While I personally will be voting for Ms. McKinney or whoever the Green Party candidate is, I think we should keep partisan politics separate from promoting 9/11 truth.
I think we all realize that 9/11 truth is not a partisan issue. Due to the number of international victims and the "global war on terror" it's not even solely an American issue. It is a global issue, it is a human issue.
As a 9/11 activist I have worked with people who espouse a wide variety of political philosophies and the one thing we all agree on is the need to restore our constitutional republic. After we accomplish that we can then debate how best to proceed.
In this highly-charged year of partisan politics let's be a calm refuge of truth and unity when we interact with the general public.
This will serve us, the cause of truth and the future of our republic best, brothers and sisters.
We have a lot of work to do between now and November, let's get busy!
The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.