Josh Nelson at HuffPo: I Stand With Van Jones

Join us at to show your unwavering support for White House green jobs advisor Van Jones.

Like sharks in the water, a right-wing lynch mob led by notorious race-baiter Glenn Beck is now circling around White House green jobs advisor Van Jones.

On the surface, their complaint centers around Jones' background and statements he previously made as an activist. Specifically, conservative blogs and media outlets have seized on a harshly-worded petition Jones signed in 2004 demanding further investigations into the 9/11 attacks. Jones has clarified since then, saying of the petition that "it certainly does not reflect my views, now or ever." But this is little more than the right-wing manufactured faux-outrage du jour. Beck began aggressively going after Jones in the wake of a campaign targeting Beck's advertisers -- organized by Color of Change -- an advocacy organization Jones founded prior to taking a position in the administration.

Sadly, the Obama administration appears to be wavering in its support of Jones. This is not acceptable. A decision to throw one of their most charismatic communicators under the bus in a vein attempt to placate a racist witch-hunt would be both foolish and ineffective. Van Jones is exactly the type of principled and effective leader we need more of in government -- not less. President Obama should make a strong public statement as soon as possible, reiterating his full support for green jobs advisor Van Jones.
Fight Back

1. Show your support for Van Jones by using the #supportvan hashtag on Twitter. Your tweet will be displayed in the grid on

2. Sign the Color of Change petition asking Glenn Beck's advertisers to stop supporting Beck's hateful agenda. You can also donate to Color of Change here.

3. Become a Fan of Van Jones on Facebook.
Statements of Support

Brad Johnson at The Wonk Room writes:

White House green jobs advisor Van Jones is under attack from Fox News as an "avowed radical revolutionary communist" and from ABC News as a "truther" with a "history of incendiary and provocative remarks." In an attempt to assassinate the character of Van Jones, the right-wing media are distorting his past political activism and cherry-picking Jones's critiques of the pollution and injustice that still haunt this nation. However, Jones's true record is one of turning away from anger and finding hope, abandoning division and seeking consensus.

David Roberts at Grist writes:

This is all about bitch-slap politics. If Jones drops out, think Beck or the right-wing slime industry will stop? Think they won't keep going after Carol Browner, John Holdren, and the rest--twisting and attacking every word and gesture from the Obama administration? "Uncovering" people as wildly caricatured leftists? Faux-populist fear merchants are like sharks; they have to keep moving, keep eating. There's no sating them. Letting Beck bag Jones would be like chum in the water.

Adam Siegel at Get Energy Smart Now writes:

Fox's Beck has turned his attention from President Barack Obama to increasingly vitriolic and deceptive attacks on a White House staff member, Van Jones, who has responsibilities related to Green Jobs. Beck's attacks are deceptive and despicable, on multiple levels, and demean not just Jones, but American democracy and the very concept of moving forward toward a more prosperous America, for both the nation and its citizens.

Martin Bosworth tweets:

read #VanJones' "The Green Collar Economy" last year & was mesmerized. It's a brilliant plan of action & I #supportVan fully. #green #p2 #fb

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom:

"Van Jones and Mayor Newsom are good friends and the mayor stands by him," Newsom spokesman Nathan Ballard said Friday

Sarah Robinson at Blog For Our Future writes:

But we know this for sure: If Beck succeeds in damaging Jones and Color of Change -- a decision that's largely in the hands President Obama -- you can count on this being the start of a fast and furious conservative witch hunt aimed at picking off every other progressive leader. What they'll learn is that this kind of minor smear is all it takes to turn liberals against each other -- and we'll effectively be in the position of letting the craziest people on the right wing decide for us who our leaders will be.

Joseph Romm of Climate Progress writes:

I am a big fan of green jobs czar clean energy jobs handyman Van Jones (see "Van Jones argues we can -- and must -- fight poverty and pollution at the same time" and "Must Read: Van Jones and the English Language"). The right wing hates the clean energy jobs message (see "Department of Energy eviscerates right-wing Spanish 'green jobs' study") so it's not surprising they are going after Van Jones.

Links and videos

are available at the original URL.

I realize this statement backs off his support of 9/11 Truth

but support for Jones is still support for the public legitimacy of 9/11 Truth. If we don't support people such as Jones, others will be more reluctant to speak out.

Harshly worded?!

Give me break. What's harsh, is people splattering on the pavement after jumping out of those buildings in despair..........then two iconic buildings destroyed and 3000 people killed...thousands of first responders poisoned.... FOR A WAR AGENDA!!

I don't support any petition hostile to 9/11 truth. The enemy of my enemy is not my friend.

It's not "racist" either. It's CIA propaganda...when will these two-party people get that through their thick heads?

I just became his fan on

I just became his fan on Facebook.

They are terrified of him. Another brilliant black man with great passion for his planet. He scares the hell out of them. Support him. Don't let someone who initially took a look and questioned the obvious be hung out to dry. One step at a time. Van Jones could make a major difference in our lives.

Well okay

my comment was harsh, but something tells me he doesn't want our support at this point....all that would do is increase the political fall out, and the guy seems to be in CYA mode at the moment. I would have respected it if he said: I support the petition I signed...and if you want me to leave, make me.

Instead the reaction now is: he didn't mean it, he doesn't support 9/11 truth, because supporting 9/11 truth is a bad thing to do. This is a mccarthyism loop, and I'm not one to adjust my convictions to the political trend of the month...

You go ahead and support, I don't mind...personally, I'm very unhappy with this, because in the end, it provides the liberal side with more excuses to not get involved with 9/11 truth, because of Glenn Beck's propaganda. If that was the goal of Beck and his handlers, to isolate 9/11 truth from the Democrats, then I guess he succeeded.

I don't see how support from the 9/11 truth movement for somebody who rejects it could help at this point. Maybe I'm wrong.


i signed too...This is a

i signed too...This is a test to see if President Obama has a spine (altho i wish Van Jones had shown his by sticking to supporting 911 truth!)


Keep Van Jones, Research 911 Truth. Even though he has recanted his position and I am disappointed, the press is still good for the movement.

I stand as a 9/11 Truther. I do not mention Van Jones.

Actually, I have been ignoring all the Van Jones controversy, because the media has tremendous focus on finding his faults.
However, "9/11 Truther" is in the news. I stand with that issue and I focus on that issue.
Example--> "9/11 Truther on Fox"

Top two Examiner writers touching on 9/11 Truth

Your chance to comment. Examiner gets a million hits/day and these two get the most traffic in politics:
and :


Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

my two cents

reaction to statements in video:
these as*holes don't cut themselves off from "radicals" like they suggest Pres. Obama to do! Cheney is contstantly on FOX news which employs such "radicals" and "conspiracy thoerists nutjobs" like Glenn Beck! Shouldn't they distance themselves from FOX news then? Oh now, they can say radical things, call dems names, lable them and yet it is patriotic! Bull Sh*t! It goes both ways! We can be "radical" if we want! What is anti-american about being "radical"? Why is everyone that shows any passion "radical"? YET any "nutjob" on their side acn go to a town hall meeting--toting their guns and scream calling our president Hitler--they are not "radical", should they lose their job if theu happen to be employed by a government entity? Gee, what about our right to free speech?

I am certainly extremely disapointed that Van Jones has denied his goal of seeking truth in the acts of 911. I am not surprised though. He is trying to protect his job which I'm sure he loves very much and is hoping will make positive change for our country's future while also attempting to clear the President from further harrassment. Still, I am deeply disapointed.

I support this man in keeping his regardless. I hope Obama will have a spin and reject calls for Van Jones to be fired.

ok--please don't harrass me

ok--please don't harrass me over the typos...... my pc keeps freezing up on me and i was typing too fast ...back to what really matters


"...the fact that the president would not only allow but appoint a man who harbors these conspiratorial beliefs to serve the United States should provoke not only concern but outrage among all Americans." [Sean Hannity]

"This is a guy who actually thinks the U.S. government committed genocide against the country." [S.E. Cupp]

"nothing more than a gutless poseur and a moral exhibitionist, easily thrilled by the dubious frisson of risk-free coffeehouse radicalism. You are beneath contempt." [Kathy Shaidle]

"It must be a great comfort to the uniformed personnel serving in the White House that they are serving alongside a man who, before he arrived in the White House six months ago, was accusing them of murdering babies, calling them terrorists, and fancied himself part of the global struggle against them and their comrades." [Michael Goldfarb]

"The would-be czar, Van Jones, turns out to be a paranoid lunatic who believes in a disgusting conspiracy theory, which stands as an insult to the people murdered on 9/11, the heroes who died trying to save them, and the heroes who died avenging them." [Doctor Zero]

"That wasn't enough for Bond, the ranking Republican on the Senate subcommittee on Green Jobs and the New Economy. On Friday, he asked for a hearing "to reassure the American people that their government is safe from (Jones') divisive, incendiary and ultimately counterproductive sentiments." [Sen. Kit Bond]

I never knew Dick Cheney was a God.

Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?


Not address the questions in the statement, or the 50+ family members that endorsed it at the time, or why not cover the reasons why something as "newsworthy" as the statement was not covered by media at the time?

Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

Faux News Online Poll: Should Van Jones Keep His Job?

Fucks News is suggesting people who raise the unanswered questions about the Bullshit Administration's failure to prevent 9/11 should not be employed by the Obushma Administration- even though Van Jones is apparently weasely claiming he wasn't aware of what he signed, or didn't authorize his signature or something- even though neither Van Jones nor any other Republocrat or fake news media like Farts News has legit answers for the questions...

The votes for an against --

The votes for an against -- 2000 : 90,000+

MSM for you.

Disclaimer- "This is not a scientific poll."

97% say "No", Van Jones should lose his job (like the ten million or so other Americans who've lost their jobs thanks to the Bush-Obama backers blowing up our economy and steering billions of bailout $ into their pockets)

Given that at most a few right wing nut job birthers care about this, given the economy, torture, war, health care, etc, this is poll is a joke.

The last non-scientific online 9/11 poll on CNN when Glenn Dreck claimed 9/11 skeptics = Timothy McVeigh showed 68% to 32% disagreeing with Dreck, until they 'fixed' the poll:

292 faux comments on this fauxnation thread:
Mainstream Media SILENT on Van Jones Controversy

Meanwhile, the 'liberal' and 'right-wing' media are truly dead silent on Sibel Edmonds' allegations- hey Curley and JamesB- why don't you give some coverage to Sibel Edmonds?
After all, she's implicated some Dems, and there's even a bisexual Dem Congresswoman who was 'hooked' and blackmailed you can get wound up about. What- you can't because she says Rethugs like Hastert, Blunt, Livingston, Feith, Wolfowitz, Grossman were involved in the trafficking of drugs and nuclear secrets and laundering money- oh well, go to hell.

the fake news media are seizing on this non-issue to try and deflect attention from the torture documents and investigations- only Republicans have been mired in sex scandals recently. Given that more and more people are losing trust in the media and govt thanks to their incessant lies and fuck ups, and thanks to the growth of new info and communications technologies, probably more real people are having their minds opened, than are being led by the nose on this one.

The price for standing up for truth- still high

AP Top News at 4:23 a.m. EDT

(AP) – 45 minutes ago

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama's adviser Van Jones has resigned amid controversy over past inflammatory statements, the White House said early Sunday. Jones, an administration official specializing in environmentally friendly "green jobs" with the White House Council on Environmental Quality was linked to efforts suggesting a government role in the 2001 terror attacks and to derogatory comments about Republicans.

Politics in America sucks......... we should stay out of it. We are about shattering the false left/right paradigm, not bolstering it. The pols and the press would love to spin this out of control and put an end to our noisy ways. Don't give them what they want, If he disavows us, then we have no choice but to distance ourselves. No worries. The press we've received is already huge. The reason it's filled with such vitriol is because the mere fact that he signed the petition has lent credibility to our cause. We don't need to do anything else.

If my recollection serves me, I remember when Cindy Sheehan signed a petition only later to claim she was deceived. And now she stands rank and file at many of our events. We should move forward in faith that "once a truther, always a truther" will prevail. Let politics twist and turn as it may. It doesn't deter us from our ultimate goal. Maybe this is the beginning of 911 truth being a hot button issue -- like gay rights, abortion, etc. If that is the case, then pat yourself on the back for helping bring 911 truth up from #600 to the top three hot issues.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for black leaders and green policies, but the paradigms of the past that endeavor to advance or deter progressive thinking are the same paradigms that inhibit America from dealing face to face with the 9/11 crisis. I have no choice but to distance myself from it all.

Not quite the same situation

Some clarification here: As I understand it, Van Jones disavowed a statement without denying having signed it (a pretty ridiculous position to be in, when you think about it). The situation with Cindy Sheehan, on the other hand, was different. What I believe you are recalling in her case was not a matter of distancing herself from the cause of 9/11 truth. Rather, in the late summer of 2007, she distanced herself from the so-called 'Kennebunkport Warning,' an apparently Larouchian effort, authored at least in part, I believe, by Webster Tarpley. This document was not so much about 9/11 truth per se, but about false-flag attacks on U.S. soil which supposedly were still to come; and not merely as a possibility to warn against and be apprehensive about, but in fact as something which signers of the document claimed to possess definite knowledge would be occurring soon. Not only did Sheehan and others disavow this statement; they denied having signed it at all--with the implicit accusation that the promoters of the document had taken their signatures from another petition and deliberately forged them on the 'Kennebunkport Warning' document.

We should welcome this

Surely these negative sentiments are a little misplaced. I think that this is a really fortunate turn of events!

All controversy is good controversy. We do not need to worry that some of what's happening here distorts the picture (from the perspective of 911 truth).

What is more important is that it gets these idiotic talking heads and moronic right-wing bloggers to come out publicly and state their position. And we see that what happens is that they are making ridiculous statements, which the majority will see for what they are.

The very vehemence of the reaction is our surest sign that we are getting to them, they are extremely worried, so we should be engaging in robust debate with them at every opportunity.

I'm not signing, but I appreciate the gift of the moment

Although I'm in deep resonance with many of Mr. Jones' visions and ideas for a green economy- ask me about my ideas for "Permaculturalizing the Pentagon-", I cannot support him in his playing deceptive politics with truth and justice. I didn't sign up for that. And this is not because I'm a puritanical idealist who thinks that the "truth" is an ultimate good in a moral universe. For example, if blackjackboots are at the door asking whether Muslims, Jews, Arabs, Christians, patriots, 9/11 "truthers", etc. are in the house, the moral answer is "no," or "none of your business" backed up by some implied force. However, I don't think this is that situation. Though, I guess you could posit that the stormtroopers are knocking on the door of the White House asking if they are housing any radical, militant, black 9/11 "truthers;" except the fact that Obama continues and is amplifying the orders that end up in the homicide of more innocent brown people in the insistent name of preventing those who attacked us on 9/11 from doing it again flies right in the face of that position.

In terms of informational reach and the sparking of discussion and debate, this is likely going to play in the favor of truth and justice. Everytime the mainstream media puts up on the top of their corporatist-sponsored screens, another concrete layer of the dam holding back the nourishing waters of truth and justice is worn away. As long as there is no violent action involved in the matter, which would be impossible anyways since all the 9/11 truth groups seek change through satyagraha, the non-violence of truthforce or soulpower, the media play surrounding getting the fact of the contention of the issue out serves the truth in the long run.

This was part of the strategic thinking behind interrupting Bill Maher's show. Yes, they can paint us as nuts, and we want to do our best to not play into their hands, but ultimately if the discussion begins to be had, no matter how contentious and vile the media feeding frenzy is, if people see "9/" or WTC 7 being demolished, those with just a little curiosity will be lead into thinking it out for themselves. And that is really the basis, I think, for the political foundation of those that advovate for seeking and exposing the truth of 9/11- a people who think for themselves in dialogue with each other and the facts as they lay.

9/11 truth, as we all know in our hearts and from experience, is one of the most politically contentious discussions of our age. It also has some of the most wide-ranging political implications of any discussion. However, it is not a shallow or myopic politics that is implied by grappling with the truth of 9/11. It serves to inform the basis for any society that is to have a politics that is life-affirming. If political and policy concerns-, no matter how impactful on human lives, such as health care, ecological/economical sustainability and abundance, war and peace are- trump reality, i.e. that which actually happened or is happening, for the sake of short-term political convenience, you will inevitably end up at some sort of colective spiritual gulag.

Mr. Jones, if you really want to create policies, and moreover, a politics of ecological and economic liberty and abundance, it's time to stand on the necessary foundation of truth and justice that must underlie the (White)housing of those policies and politics. You are not so special an organizer that the quite compelling ideas you have set forth won't continue to percolate into the future, while seeding the present with possibility, if you were to be hung out to dry for your convictions (not your views or your opinions). The world and multitudes of the unique human beings that inhabit it continue to be burned alive, fueled by the racist, vicious lies you have just cowed to and, in many ways, cozied up to.

It's time to truth on up homey!

“Strange times are these in which we live when old and young are taught in falsehoods school. And the one man that dares to tell the truth is called at once a lunatic and fool.” –Plato

"We must speak the truth about terror." --George W. Bush


Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

The Van Jones smear campaign was designed to hit now...

It is my personal speculation that the smear campaign against Jones was designed to hit the news just prior to September 11th in order to denegrate 9/11 Truth. The "black ops media" wanted to throw a first punch, just like the National Geographic first strike.

My view is to ignore the Van Jones issue. But continue to push the 9/11 Truth issue; to continue to encourage people to view and look and observe what is being censored about 9/11.

Yes. It underscores the


It underscores the need for a massive grassroots movement. There is no top-down option.

Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.