Barrie Zwicker: The Peace Movement versus the 9/11Truth movement
[Submitted to 911Blogger via email - LW]
Report from Boston
The Peace Movement versus the 9/11Truth movement
by Barrie Zwicker
What goes with the “split” between the anti-war movement and the 9/11Truth movement? Some light was shed on this regrettable reality in Boston the weekend of Jan. 30-31, 2010. On Saturday New England United (NEU), an umbrella group, held an anti-war strategy conference. The next day Northeast 9/11Truth held its strategy conference, in part an analysis of the previous day’s events.
As both a lifelong member of the peace movement, and a committed 9/11Truther, I attended all of the Saturday conference where I was a workshop leader, and the first half of the Sunday conference (having to leave early because of travel arrangements). My main points:
1) There is a split but it has not been initiated, nor is it maintained, by members of the 9/11Truth movement. Truthers stand just as proudly and tall in their opposition to war as anyone in the peace movement. Truthers also are just as fully dedicated to the goals of justice, equality and environmentalism as are anti-war activists.
2) The split is unilateral from the anti-war movement’s side, especially from leaders and organizers. Those at the grassroots level trust and take their cues from the leaders. The result is a widespread attitude toward 9/11Truth that ranges from scepticism to outright hostility. This is why I choose the heading “The Peace Movement versus the 9/11Truth Movement.”
3) A leading cause of the unilateral split is the work of planted agents of the state – spooks -- whose instructions are to do this splitting. The Chinese call such agents “splittists.” The peace movement has been around for decades, so there’s been loads of time for the national security state to install numerous agents within it. Added to their usual instructions to slyly foment divisiveness within peace groups and derail effective anti-war actions are new orders to combat the dynamic truth movement.
Point 3 is tough, I know. But it’s an issue that must be confronted and in no way should be taken as an across-the-board slam at all members of the peace movement. I am not alone in my assessment. At the Sunday Truthers conference the first topic was “How explain the resistance to 9/11Truth in the peace movement?” Paul Zarembka, Professor of Economics at the University of Buffalo and editor of The Hidden History of 9/11, offered four reasons. His first: “agents and gatekeepers among us.” Sander Hicks, author of The Big Wedding: 9/11, the Whistleblowers, and the Cover-Up, offered seven reasons. His first: “The state, COINTELPRO.”
Of course, activities by state infiltrators do not completely explain the split. Other reasons include fears of all kinds, ignorance of history, a powerful culture of militaristic nationalism in the USA and the largest reason everywhere, the treasonous complicity of corporate mainstream media and almost all so-called alternative media. They conspire in de facto censorship, deliberate avoidance of investigative reporting plus psychological warfare against the Truth movement.
These explanations for denial of or hostility to 9/11Truth also apply to the population at large and across issues. Peter Phillips is a professor of sociology at Sonoma State University in California, president of the Media Freedom Foundation/Project Censored and serves on the 9/11Truth steering committee. Phillips and Mickey Huff in a recent article state: “An international truth emergency, now in evidence, is the result of a lack of fact based, transparent, and truthful reporting on fraudulent elections, compromised 9/11 investigations, illegal pre-emptive wars, compounded by top down corporate media propaganda across the spectrum on public issues.” They add: “Consumers of corporate news media—especially those whose understandings are framed primarily from that medium alone—are embedded in a state of excited delirium of knowinglessness.”
In my estimation the black operations of government moles are a key reason for the malfeasance of the media as well as the main explanation for the peace movement’s antagonism against 9/11Truth. The undoubted existence of undercover operatives and agents provocateurs has not been discussed nearly to the extent justified. A major elevation of this topic is ‘way overdue.
Followers in the anti-war movement “do not realize,” as Paul Craig Roberts wrote Sept. 15th, 2009, in Information Clearing House, “that by accepting the [government’s] 9/11 explanation they have undermined their own opposition to the war. Once you accept that Muslim terrorists did it, it is difficult to oppose punishing them for the event. [Anti-war activists] do not understand that if you grant the government its premise for war, it is impossible to oppose the war.”
It’s tough to prove agentry. Agents do not “out” themselves. Covert activity is their game. Deception and betrayal are their tools. Other approaches, however, are available to spot spooks. “By their fruits ye shall know them” is helpful. When ostensible peaceniks committed to peace and democracy engage in name-calling, we are entitled to ask whether they are simply individuals lacking civility and self-control, or are individuals deliberately causing tensions. When those who “study peace” have had eight years to invest just an hour or two looking into the overwhelming evidence that the official conspiracy theory of 9/11 cannot possibly be true, and have failed to do so, we are entitled to theorize beyond the explanation that we are simply “puzzled.” When members of the peace movement avow that they are committed to truth, justice and peace but fail in their commitment to truth in connection with 9/11 -- arguably the most pivotal war-triggering event of modern times – we’re entitled to question the authenticity of their commitment. It would be insulting to explain their shortcoming as due to stupidity. And if the explanation is ignorance, after eight years during which all persons interested in current affairs must have encountered evidence of 9/11Truth, it must be in most cases some variation of wilful ignorance.
Consider how easy it is for agents of the state to operate. First, the state has virtually unlimited resources for recruiting, training and deploying agents. Second, agents have no legal or moral restraints. They act with complete impunity. (It’s gratifying that there now is an International Coalition Against Impunity, www.icaihokok.org). Volunteer organizations are easy as pie to infiltrate. All it takes is a trained sneak with a believable “legend” to lie his or her way into the confidence of the group.
The world of “guerrilla marketing” provides examples of the ease with which groups can be manipulated. A vodka company identifies heavy vodka drinkers -- those who already drink their brand and others they entice to try it. The drinkers are all friends together. The heavy users are “opinion leaders.” By their drink orders at bars they are “role models” who trigger others to order the same brand they do. It’s called peer group pressure. Even more effective is a conscious agent following sophisticated instructions in swaying a peer group.
There was an illuminating lead-up to the conference of New England United. Only after months-long effective lobbying by an indefatigable member of Northeast 9/11Truth did NEU organizers agree that a person identified with the 9/11Truth movement could be one of four panelists in the afternoon. This was Peter Dale Scott, former Canadian diplomat, an English professor at the University of California in Berkeley and author of The Road to 9/11. Scott, whose work I much admire, in fact has drawn short of fully recognizing and endorsing the voluminous evidence that 9/11 was an inside job. Nevertheless, his acceptance at an anti-war gathering in 2010 was generally agreed to be a “breakthrough.”
It turned out that he had to cancel scant days before, as his wife took seriously ill. The Northeast Truthers proposed that, should an attempt to have Scott address the NEU conference by video-over-Skype fail, that I be the stand-in. The organizers rejected me (believe me, this account is not motivated by sour grapes) on the basis, after alleged “extensive research,” of my alleged “extreme rightwing” views and my alleged long and close association with historian and writer Webster Tarpley. He in turn was identified only as a LaRouchite. For anyone who knows me this description was bizarrely incorrect. If news of my “extreme rightwing views” reaches the Mounties it will puzzle the hell out of them.
As it turned out Scott’s addressing the audience in Boston from California via Skype worked. Relevant to this report, he made this comment: “This brings us to 9/11. […] before the last plane had crashed in Pennsylvania, the White House authorized the institution of so-called Continuity of Government [COG] changes. There is no doubt that COG was introduced – the 9/11 Report confirms it twice, on pages 38 and 326. And I have little doubt that the COG plans, still in force today under president Obama, are the justification for the surveillance agents who are with you in the room as I speak to you at this moment.”
The 300 or so attendees at the NEU conference studiously avoided the 9/11Truth literature table. Book sales are a key indicator of interest. I sold three of the 20 copies I had brought of my book Towers of Deception: The Media Cover-Up of 9/11 (fortunately the rest sold to Truthers the next day). Other Truther materials similarly were mainly passed by.
After the speakers of the Saturday morning panel had been heard, the floor was opened for questions. The first questioner was a young man in a green tee shirt. I’d say he was a plant. With reference to nothing any of the panelists had said, he claimed to be “disturbed” by “the logic” of the 9/11Truth movement, and asked the panelists what they thought. Glen Ford of the Glen Ford Black Agenda (radio) Report responded that “the inside job [theory] doesn’t fly” and that “we have all the dirt on what they [the oligarchy] [has] already done.” This garnered a great deal of enthusiastic applause, accompanied by a few boos. The next day Sander Hicks reported a conversation he had subsequently with Ford, who told him that he answered the question the way he did “out of deference to the organizers.”
Nevertheless, the workshop session entitled “Covert and False Flag Operations and 9/11: Pretext for the Continuing War on Terror” was standing room only with about 65 in attendance. My poll of those attending showed that only two believed the official 9/11 story. All the others raised their hands for “inside job.”
At the Sunday Northeast Truthers conference Hicks suggested that part of the reason for peace movement members’ antagonism to 9/11Truth is that they know they are the “fading sunset left” who have “lost the passion,” whereas the Truther movement is fresh and passionate. Along the same line of thought Frank Tolopko, producer of the bi-weekly radio program “The 9/11 Report” on WBCR in Great Barrington, Mass. suggested a fundamental reason that a left gatekeeper such as Amy Goodman would reject 9/11Truth is that she is promoting “a concept of bourgeois democracy that is over.” As I quoted Chris Hedges from his new book Empire of Illusion: the US form of governance has become “participatory fascism.” Goodman takes foundation money to promote democracy now on Democracy Now. Said Tolopko: “If the system can’t be reformed, if 9/11 is an inside job, then she’s out of a job. Goodman is terrified.”
Alphonse Olszewski of St. Louis, Missouri, founder of Veterans for 9/11Truth, knows the power of naming. One contribution he’s made to anti-splittism is renaming his group Veterans for 9/11 Truth, Peace and Justice. There cannot be peace without justice and there cannot be justice without truth. Anything that underscores the primacy of truth, in my view, is to the good. And anything that builds bridges of common understanding and respect between people of peace who understand the significance of the fraudulent nature of 9/11 and people of peace who have not yet connected that dot to the anti-war dot is to the good. I was gratified to see somewhere over the weekend that the admonition “speak truth to power” is outdated, because “power never listens.” The suggested update: “Challenge Power With Truth.”
For those members of the peace movement who are sincere, think for themselves, and are open, I can’t recommend too highly a videotape of a short talk given by Graeme MacQueen at the “We Demand Transparency” conference organized by Sander Hicks in New York City Sept. 12 and 13 of 2009. MacQueen is an associate professor in the Religious Studies Department and in Hamilton and former director of McMaster’s Centre for Peace Studies.
In concluding his talk, addressed to “not just people in the peace movement but everybody,” he said: “This is the worst time in history to inflame societies with the spirit of war; it is the worst time to be taken in by fraudulent trigger incidents, the most important time to reject the war system, and to co-operate with the rest of humanity to solve the grave ecological problems we face, which collectively threaten our civilization.” He went on to quote the testimony of a New York fireman, Kenneth Rogers. Rogers testified he looked directly at the collapsing towers on 9/11, hearing explosions and seeing evidence of them. “The reasons he saw things the others didn’t see,” MacQueen said, “is because he didn’t leave the scene and he didn’t turn his head away. He stood there and he looked at it and that’s all I’m asking members of the peace movement to do. Stop turning your head away; don’t flee the scene. Look at it, please.” The video can be found at http://www.boston911truth.org
- LeftWright's blog
- Login to post comments
Thanks, Barrie!
I hope that everyone, especially those involved in public activism and outreach to the peace movement, will read this very important article, reflect on the key issues and participate in an ongoing dialogue on said issues, both here and with their local groups.
Our continuing success as a movement will draw more and more attention from those trying to maintain the cover-up. Ultimately, our success will depend on our understanding the tactics and techniques of infiltration, disruption and gatekeeping, and the effective countermeasures we will need to employ to neutralize them.
I think that this article is an excellent starting point for this critical discussion.
Thanks again, Barrie!
[Tomorrow I'm going to an anti-war organizing meeting for the March 20 demonstration in San Francisco]
The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.
Our strategy
"Our continuing success as a movement will draw more and more attention from those trying to maintain the cover-up."
We need to view this as a good thing. It demonstrates that our actions to date have been very effective. It is also forcing our opponents to come out from the shadows. Remember, we didn't go looking for them, they've come looking for us. This is a healthy arrangement for us and we should work to maintain this upper hand. IMO the best response is to ignore "disrupters" and "disinformants" as much as possible, which will force them to come out further into the light of day. Infiltrators have two main goals, IMO. One goal is to throw a wrench into the machine to slow our growth and create internal discord, the other is to provoke us into acts that will make us look dangerous. And they do this while attempting to protect their "cover." Confronting them protects their cover because they can stop right where they are and not have to expend more effort to get noticed or call in for back-up. But ignoring them and moving away from the temptation to confront them forces them to change their strategy, become even more vocal, and maybe call in for reinforcements, thereby forcing them to expose themselves even more. WE WANT THIS. More people will be forced to "go on record," something which any of our opponents who have a serious resumé don't want to have happen.
When people like Shermer, Aaronovitch, Craig, et. al. raise their head and spew their venom, we should (IMHO, again) look the other way and go about our business spreading the truth to those who really want to hear it. If these guys worked directly for the govt. or entities tied to the attacks it would a different story, but they don't, they are free-lance shills and not worth a minute of our time. Their mission depends on their ability to engage us, and that should be the easiest part for us to deny them.
We need to constantly remind ourselves that we are gaining ground because most of us are sincere and we tirelessly spread the truth -- not because we can or cannot shoot these mother f@%$ers out of the water. We need to act more like "victors" and less like "victims," in my extremely humble opinion.
challenging the peace movement by uniting ourselves
By this spring, a group of leaders in the truth movement is working to launch a new national campaign. For some details, see Minutes - January 27, 2010 -
www.911blogger.com/node/20750#comment-226522
The Misprision of Treason campaign will seek to identify key evidence of treason or cover-up; using US code 18 (Sec. 2382) - Misprision of treason -- which states: "Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same to the President or to some judge of the United States, or to the governor or to some judge or justice of a particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both."
We will demand, with evidence in hand, local Judges to take some appropriate action or risk a felony. They can sign our petition or contact their superiors, and work to conduct a proper investigation. We will also write letters and op/eds to publish in our local newspapers explaining why we are taking such actions, and encourage the real peace movement to flourish. 9/11 demolition is key, as well as evidence of torture, and other deceptions witnessed by credible sources.
We will post a draft on 911blogger before it is finalized.. We would want a universal clear and motivating petition and resolution that can close the gap between the anti-war community and truth activists. This may help them agree to take the blue pill, and see the connection of the false flag and the betrayal of our country. Our timing is to have a completed draft by the Treason in America Conference, March 6.
Cointel works when we over-focus or empower the plants.. rather go direct to grassroots individuals and campaigns that can separate the wheat from the chaff. From their actions, we can judge and work with those we can trust. And it is getting closer for the barriers to come down; things can only get so much more worse. This spring 2010 is key. Barrie, thank you for this article.. and all you do.. it is important to note our reality, and somehow help achieve a transformation in governments, if possible.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Fit to transmit in post Cassini flyby era
<>~<> www.FlybyNews.com <>~<>
for life's survival in the 21st Century
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Enforcement
This appears to be a great development. How will you enforce your claims against the parties?
Contact me directly for ideas.
With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org
_____________________________________________
I work for the 9-11 First Responders, the 9-11 victims, and all those who are being slaughtered and tortured because of 9-11.
Public Pressure
Bruno,
I will definitely try to contact you.. and hope you join the action team working on and defining this campaign. By confronting Judges, Governors, President with evidence of Treason, we will then write letters to local newspapers to request such actions and growing pressure to call out the cover-up treason.
The real key is a universal and simple enough statement to expose Treason, and adaptation of this campaign by not just those involved with 9/11 truth, but those who can finally awaken and help us expose the lies used to justify atrocities of all kinds, such as illegal energy wars, torture, loss of civil freedoms, and financial and health related terrorism.
Bruno, i look forward to working with you on this Misprision of treason campaign.
jonathan
9/11 Truth Leader Teleconference
The Problem For Various Social Movements
Various social interest causes continuously and wrongly petition the political establishment seeking change.
Major figures of the federal and state executive levels of government for lack of a better term seem to act as "agents" on behalf of other powerful interests and likely occupy their powerful positions as a result of various manipulations by these other powerful interests.
Various social interest causes seem to still wrongly assume that if they just protest enough, that the powers-that-be will finally notice and listen.
Such movements will probably only acheive real change when they seek to become the powers-that-be themselves via third party candidacies that can replace the current powers-that-be via the ballot box.
Government systems and power are merely a powerful tool operated by those who do not operate in the public interest.
Sooth
"...Government systems and power is a merely a powerful tool operated by those who do not operate in the public interest."
problems and solutions
the complexities of transforming our government system, which goes way further back than any individual, can be overwhelming. And yes, I agree with the futility of protesting on some levels, since the focus is often on only a part of the problem with no solution offered, beside vague generalities or ideologies.
That's why those rallying around the key issue of september 11th are the leaders of the peace movement. those stuck in their patterns while obeying the will enforced by the media and nongovernmental organizations, aka money, are missing the kingpin issue that has been used to justify current conflicts.
more than protesting, our campaigns must continue to awaken people to such factors, not depending alone on the government agencies to change. we need to unite with one another, in the truth movement and beyond. we have yet to accomplish this sufficiently; i am honored to work with those still trying and working on this issue.
there is no one that has not been impacted by the false flag operations of september 11. the best way to avoid the next one is by exposing the lies of the current elitists in hot pursuit of maintaining their control and order. They have stooped into denying reality and basics of science and physics.
Any yet our movement is inspired by integrity with individuals, which if we reach a critical mass of those awakened, can usurp the elitists' mad power plans, and help transform it.. but truth and justice leading to peace is key. together we have a possibility of succeeding. no wonder agents are working to mess up our unity, but it is for their own good, too. 2010 has to be a pivotal one..
For more on ideas collaborating to unite our movement, I suggest reviewing
9/11 Truth Leader Teleconference
and Recent Issue of Flyby News:
The Biggest Lie * The Hague * Howard Zinn
Thanks for the info!
But I think you meant to write "red pill" instead of "blue pill".
http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/red+pill
Redpill
Redpill is a term that describes a human who has been freed from the Matrix, a fictional computer-generated world set at the end of the 20th Century. Redpill is the opposite of Bluepill.
Borrowing from the movie, the terms blue pill and red pill have become a popular metaphor for the choice between blissful ignorance (blue) and embracing the sometimes painful truth (red).
http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Bluepill
Bluepill
A bluepill describes two different types of people in the Matrix: those that are completely unaware since birth of their status as a pod-born human, and those who, at some point, are presented with a choice and choose to forget this information.
In The Matrix, the first feature film of the Matrix series, Morpheus finds a computer hacker who called himself Neo. Morpheus then offers Neo a choice of ingesting a red pill or a blue pill:
"You take the blue pill, the story ends, you wake in your bed and you believe whatever you want to believe."
mike palecek comment
i would not be surprised if i turned around the blue or red pill's meaning, or wikipedia, colors on the surface is one thing, reality is another..
fyi.. here is an excerpt from an email from Mike Palecek with his comment on "Peace Movement vs. 9/11 Truth Movement."
" ..this I'm-sure-it's-not-brief-enough editorial comment.
Peace Movement vs. 9/11 Truth Movement
Though maybe not so much recently, I have been a member of the peace movement, I suppose.
I think my lifetime subscription to Vegetarian Lasagna Magazine is paid through going to prison and county jail, picketing, long effing walks with big effing blisters, trying to run for Congress in northwest Iowa as an anti-war candidate, sending in crossed-out tax forms, rad bumper stickers, letters to the editor shit like that.
And for the past fifteen years I have been trying to learn how to write novels that make a difference, after I went crazy in jail and decided I could not do that again , that I would not, could not volunteer for jail, not that there's anything wrong with that, but that I couldn't ... oh, it's complicated, cowardice is peppered throughout ... anyway, I've been writing you see ... trying to.
Not to brag, nothing to brag about, just as a sort of preface.
Okay. I also think that 9/11 was an inside job.
And I can't figure out why the peace movement keeps the 9/11 movement at arm's length.
So, as a not-so-perfect spokesman-person for/to the peace movement I want to say that we really should embrace the truth movement.
We should go to 911blogger.com. We should learn about We Are Change and David Ray Griffin and Jim Fetzer and Kevin Barrett and Barry Jennings and Loose Change ... and Richard Gage and lots of people who are really fighting our fight for us.
"9/11 Truth" really does get to the bottom of things.
"U.S. Out of Afghanistan" is fine, but not nearly enough, just as one effing light beer in the frig after eight hours at work.
Mike Palecek
Strategy Towards The Peace Movement
Barrie says:
"The result is a widespread attitude toward 9/11Truth that ranges from skepticism to outright hostility."
Barrie then adds:
"A leading cause of the unilateral split is the work of planted agents of the state – spooks -- whose instructions are to do this splitting. The Chinese call such agents “splittists.” The peace movement has been around for decades, so there’s been loads of time for the national security state to install numerous agents within it. Added to their usual instructions to slyly foment divisiveness within peace groups and derail effective anti-war actions are new orders to combat the dynamic truth movement."
In the current article posted at www.DNotice.org (The NORAD Papers VI), Popular Mechanics (PM) magazine and NORAD are shown lying (in the most mainstram source one can find on what happened on 9/11) when it comes to NORAD's monitoring capabilities within the United States on 9/11. Now this is not a case of not "connecting the dots". This is an outright lie. Here is what PM and NORAD say in the March 2005 PM article on September 11 conspiracy theories:
"Why couldn't ATC find the hijacked flights? When the hijackers turned off the planes' transponders, which broadcast identifying signals, ATC had to search 4500 identical radar blips crisscrossing some of the country's busiest air corridors. And NORAD's sophisticated radar? It ringed the continent, looking outward for threats, not inward. "It was like a doughnut," Martin says [Major Douglas Martin, public affairs officer for NORAD]. "There was no coverage in the middle." Pre-9/11, flights originating in the States were not seen as threats and NORAD wasn't prepared to track them."
Now who says PM and NORAD are lying about NORAD's true monitoring capabilities over the United States on 9/11? Would you believe The 9/11 Commission Report (which was published the year preceding the PM article)? With respect to interagency collaboration between the FAA and NORAD in the event of a hijacking on any give day before September 11, 2001, the commission report says of NORAD’s radar tracking abilities for hijacked flights originating within the United States:
"NORAD would receive tracking information for the hijacked aircraft either from joint use radar [radar that PM refers to above as the radar sites that "ringed the continent".] or from the relevant FAA air traffic control facility [Notice that Major Martin and PM say nothing about these other FAA air traffic control facilities that also provided NORAD with tracking information.]. Every attempt would be made to have the hijacked aircraft squawk 7500 to help NORAD track it."
As for the actual day of September 11, 2001, the commission report says of NORAD’s radar tracking abilities for flights originating within the United States:
"F-15 fighters were scrambled at 8:46 from Otis Air Force Base. But NEADS did not know where to send the alert fighter aircraft, and the officer directing the fighters pressed for more information: "I don't know where I'm scrambling these guys to. I need a direction, a destination." Because the hijackers had turned off the plane's transponder, NEADS personnel spent the next minutes searching their radar scopes for the primary radar return. American 11 struck the North Tower at 8:46. Shortly after 8:50, while NEADS personnel were still trying to locate the flight, word reached them that a plane had hit the World Trade Center."
"Controllers at NEADS located an unknown primary radar track [Flight 77], but "it kind of faded" over Washington. The time was 9:38.The Pentagon had been struck by American 77 at 9:37:46.The Langley fighters were about 150 miles away."
"NEADS first received a call about United 93 from the military liaison at Cleveland Center at 10:07. Unaware that the aircraft had already crashed [at 10:03], Cleveland passed to NEADS the aircraft's last known latitude and longitude. NEADS was never able to locate United 93 on radar because it was already in the ground."
"NEADS never lost track of Delta 1989, and even ordered fighter aircraft from Ohio and Michigan to intercept it."
These candid admissions from the commission report were found by me two weeks ago (I was doing some more research on NORAD, after 75% of my edits on Wiki's NORAD page were removed, when I shockingly came upon them. I couldn't believe my good fortune, or that no one had found them earlier! I'll be getting back to Wiki shortly to correct them using the 9/11 Commission Report citations above!).
Barrie, why don't you and others show persons in the Peace Movement the above quotes from PM and The 9/11 Commission Report? If the person shown the quotes is a legitimate peace activist (as are 99.99% of them), then they will show skepticism to outright hostility not towards the 9/11 Truth Movement, but towards the official 9/11 account. They should also come to the conclusion that their leaders in the Peace Movement are also liars, when those leaders continue to throw invective at the 9/11 Truth Movement despite the fact that even the 9/11 Commission Report affirms the 9/11 Truth Movement's position on NORAD's true monitoring capabilities on 9/11. Honest persons within the Peace Movement will see that the 9/11 Truth Movement was right about NORAD all along!
Persons in the Peace Movement will say "Well the 9/11 Truth Movement was right about NORAD, maybe I should look into their claims on how the World Trade Center fell."
Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief DNotice.org
Washington, DC
I and my fellow
left wing friends know that 9/11 was a false flag operation and recognize the event as a a giant crack in the vail of fraud that blinds us from reality... The truth is there for those who are willing to see. I must say at first I assumed most of the 9/11 Truthers would lean more to the left (it seemed a natural fit)...and I am uncomfortable with some of the "anti-choice" or libertarian impulses within the movement...But I have decided those differences are small when faced with the reality of living like corporate slaves in a perpetual state of war. Though I lived through the Vietnam War during my late teens and early twenties, I realize now there is no peace movement without 9/11 Truth....or an understanding of "deep" events in general.
Political Rainbow
democracydiva,
those in the 9/11 Truth Movement represent a real rainbow of the political spectrum. Then again, when elements within the Federal government obviously kill 3,000 people, it's easy to see why the 9/11 Truth Movement has so may persons with diverse political philosophies coming together. The attacks on 9/11 were just so terribly obvious as to who really carried them out.
Although I must admit America did a better job on 9/11 then the British on 7/7. The attacks on London are embarrassingly obvious. One would think the British would have done a better job, considering they've been doing false-flag operations for a lot longer than America.
Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief DNotice.org
Washington, DC
"Although I must admit
"Although I must admit America did a better job on 9/11 then the British on 7/7. The attacks on London are embarrassingly obvious. One would think the British would have done a better job, considering they've been doing false-flag operations for a lot longer than America." [QUOTE]
I don't think that's fair ,Brian, considering line between British & American was only drawn in 1776. The history of false flag operations far predates that . Before that British/American history is held in common.
Radical Chic...Mostly Right
democracydiva,
I remember the Vietnam War also. I came to the United States one month before my ninth birthday in 1969.
Let me say that there were two anti-war blocks in those days:
1. Those who believed that America was evil and the North Viets were good; and
2. Those who believed the Vietnam War was un-winnable, and therefore America should leave.
The former got all the press, while the latter were silenced because they didn't want to be associated with the so-called radicals.
Now I am very much aware that it was America that reneged on elections after the French pulled out of Vietnam (they knew Ho Chi Minh would win), therefore the North Viets had good reason to invade the south. However, while many things the radicals were saying back then I now realize were true, they were dishonest in singing the praises of North Vietnamese society (though North Vietnamese people are some of the nicest you'll ever meet....I happen to live next door to such a diplomatic family from Hanoi, not to mention the other families living in my apartment building and the building next door).
Politically America had no choice but to oppose elections after the French pulled out. I'm not saying that was right, I'm saying that was the politics. Also, America was resigned politically to go to war to keep the South non-communist. Those were the politics we maneuvered ourselves into back then: doing everything to forestall a confrontation with the USSR by going after the little fish instead. However, the communists were not asleep at the helm. They took advantage of America's blunders. The Vietnam war would have been won IF the Chinese had not intervened with the regiments they "volunteered" to fight America. The reason we never heard about this Chinese involvement in Vietnam is because big business wanted to open up China to trade. Well, that ain't going to happen if the American people find out that the Chinese are killing our boys in Vietnam. When a Republican finally took power in 1969, big business got their wish. Nixon went to China!
Another reason we never heard about China's involvement in Vietnam is because no one wanted to go to war with China (just like no one wanted to go to war with the USSR after World War II).
As I've matured, I have come to understand that those who are peace makers know that the two parties agreeing to peace terms would really prefer to be victorious instead (that's human nature: a defeated enemy is an enemy one doesn't have to worry about attacking you anymore). Because war is so terrible, the job of the peace maker is to embarrass both warring parties into agreeing to peace, then let time do its work in cementing that peace.
Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief DNotice.org
Washington, DC
very insightful concluding paragraph
Did you write this? It's brilliant.
"Because war is so terrible, the job of the peace maker is to embarrass both warring parties into agreeing to peace, then let time do its work in cementing that peace."
You Can Quote Me
zmzmzm,
sorry for the delay in replying. I've been busy commenting in Frank Legge's Flight 77 news entry. Anyway, yeah, the sentence is 100% mine. However, it took me 49 years to figure it out!
Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief DNotice.org
Washington, DC
The unfortunate truth is
The unfortunate truth is that both movements are controlled from within by our enemies. The 911truth movement by those who push a narrow focus (CD,CIT flyover,no plane,space beam etc.) claiming to seek a 'smoking gun' while doing everything possible to suppress discussion of the bigger picture and encouraging pointless speculation/discussion as a pure time waster..hint,hint! And the anti war movement by those who refuse to even consider if 911 was an inside job.
This is going to come down to sincere individuals focusing upon the big picture & who benefits. Each telling the truth to everyone who will listen without top down organization which our enemies can control.
No, They're Just a Distraction
N/T
I don't know why
you got negative votes. Both groups have been infiltrated. That is obvious and you don't deserve any negative votes. Oh well the negative votes just proves your point. In one of Berry's old interviews he even admits that the 9/11 truth movement has been infiltrated.
It's That First Sentence
Commenter is stating that our movement is CONTROLLED by plants. That's like saying that Nico Haupt is bossman of the New York movement. As if.
Or Judy Wood is controlling AE911Truth
The way I see it
is that nobody controls the 9/11 truth movement but we do have people who I consider leaders. People like DRG and a few others. Same thing goes with the peace movement. I would say Cindy Sheehan is the top person in that movement.
Lost in Victory
9-11 Joe,
Cindy was discarded like so much rubbish when the Democrats won the presidency.
To hell with the Peace Movement.
Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief DNotice.org
Washington, DC
I have to
agree with you brian, perhaps Cindy will join up with us. I wouldn't mind that at all. I hope she at least considers it.
Cindy IS with us...
as all of the Peace movement should be. And WE should be out there with the Peace Movement.
Our group has saturated the Dallas Peace People with Information. I think a lot of them are with us.
Though NOT the leadership. We are welcome at all their public events.
Event endorsement?
Joe -
It sounds like your experience with the peace movement in Dallas is very similar to ours in San Francisco (that seems a bit odd on its face, eh?).
Have you guys ever officially endorsed one of their events? Given them money to get on the inside organizing committees?
At an organizing meeting for the March 20th anti-war event in SF this past Saturday we got very mixed messages from some of the key people running the meeting and I'm wondering if you have tried working with them through their process and what your experience has been, if you had.
I hope that you and yours are well.
Thanks and keep up the great work in Dallas!
The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.
Correct Joe
We should unite. Forget this divide and conquer crap. That is playing right into their hands.
Remember David Chandler's L-Curve?
Yeah, I agree with you guys that there are plants everywhere.
Remember David's L-Curve?
When we realize HOW RICH THEY ARE, it must cost much less than a cup of coffee(of our standard) for them to pay for a plant.
That's why we see so many of them around though some are not using their brain well enough, perhaps...OR simply they don't know some vital facts.
Anyhow, I wish they(plants/spooks) will wake up someday, regret what they are doing now and join us well and truly.
Someday soon...
And I'd be surprised if this post doesn't get buried with many negative points like happened before, LOL
=================================
9/11 Truth Australia
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Aus911Truth
September 11th was an Inside Job!
http://www.youtube.com/aftertruth
SOLUTION
http://aus911truth.blogspot.com/2009/11/solution.html
Controlled Demolition is a Fact
The controlled demolition hypothesis is well supported by video analysis, basic physics principles, and laboratory investigations on ground zero dust samples. It is reasonable to conclude that controlled demolition of the WTC is a fact.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Yes CD is proven and is also our strongest evidence.
I am very wary of any "truther" who discourages talking about CD. By NOT talking about CD you take away the truthers best tools for exposing the 9/11 fraud and you cut out the massive research resources and evidence of Richard Gage, Steven Jones, Kevin Ryan, and the many scholars and building construction experts. Basically by taking CD out of your arsenol of truth you are throwing away your very best and biggest weapon of truth.
Aghast At The Silence On Huge Find
AtomicBomb,
how can you say CD is the strongest evidence? Tell me where can one find support for CD in mainstream literature? Zero. Now tell me where you can find support that NORAD did monitor aircraft that originated within the United States on 9/11. The 9/11 Commission Report, as detailed in the latest article at www.DNotice.org, is where.
You know, what I found in the 9/11 Commission Report on NORAD is huge. One of the biggest stories to hit the 9/11 Truth Movement in years, and no one has made one solitary comment about it. 9/11 Blogger assigned my article to the blogs section grave yard (at least 9/11 Blogger posted it in the blogs section. 9/11 Truth.org did nothing. Not even an email saying "great catch, Dean")!
For those of you wondering what I'm talking about, well read the article below, and ask yourself why the silence:
The NORAD Papers VI
--Unnoticed Passages In The 9/11 Commission Report Destroys NORAD’s And Popular Mechanic’s Contention That NORAD Did Not Monitor Flights Originating Within Domestic Airspace On September 11, 2001--
In the March 2005 issue of Popular Mechanics (PM) magazine an article appeared titled Debunking the 9/11 Myths which, according to the article’s subtitle, "…examines the evidence and consults the experts to refute the most persistent conspiracy theories of September 11."1 In the section dealing with NORAD, titled No Stand-Down Order, the article explains NORAD’s seemingly lackluster response to the September 11 attacks with the following:
Why couldn't ATC find the hijacked flights? When the hijackers turned off the planes' transponders, which broadcast identifying signals, ATC had to search 4500 identical radar blips crisscrossing some of the country's busiest air corridors. And NORAD's sophisticated radar? It ringed the continent, looking outward for threats, not inward. "It was like a doughnut," Martin says [Major Douglas Martin, public affairs officer for NORAD]. "There was no coverage in the middle." Pre-9/11, flights originating in the States were not seen as threats and NORAD wasn't prepared to track them.2
In previous supplements of The NORAD Papers (at www.DNotice.org), I posted articles/documents published before September 11, 2001 that positively affirmed NORAD’s robust monitoring capabilities over the territorial airspace of the United States. These pre-911 articles/documents affirmed that NORAD tracked all aircraft (both foreign and domestic flights originating in the United States) over the air space of the United States. Recently, however, I regrettably discovered that I was not the first to learn of NORAD’s true monitoring capabilities over the United States and write about it. To my surprise, The 9/11 Commission Report3 was the first to detail NORAD’s true monitoring capabilities over the airspace of the United States.
With respect to interagency collaboration between the FAA and NORAD in the event of a hijacking on any give day before September 11, 2001, the commission report says of NORAD’s radar tracking abilities for hijacked flights originating within the United States:
NORAD would receive tracking information for the hijacked aircraft either from joint use radar [radar that PM refers to above as the radar sites that "ringed the continent".4] or from the relevant FAA air traffic control facility [Notice that Major Martin and PM say nothing about these other FAA air traffic control facilities that also provided NORAD with tracking information.]. Every attempt would be made to have the hijacked aircraft squawk 7500 to help NORAD track it.5
As for the actual day of September 11, 2001, the commission report says of NORAD’s radar tracking abilities for flights originating within the United States:
F-15 fighters were scrambled at 8:46 from Otis Air Force Base. But NEADS did not know where to send the alert fighter aircraft, and the officer directing the fighters pressed for more information: "I don't know where I'm scrambling these guys to. I need a direction, a destination." Because the hijackers had turned off the plane's transponder, NEADS personnel spent the next minutes searching their radar scopes for the primary radar return. American 11 struck the North Tower at 8:46. Shortly after 8:50, while NEADS personnel were still trying to locate the flight, word reached them that a plane had hit the World Trade Center.6
Controllers at NEADS located an unknown primary radar track [Flight 77], but "it kind of faded" over Washington. The time was 9:38.The Pentagon had been struck by American 77 at 9:37:46.The Langley fighters were about 150 miles away.7
NEADS first received a call about United 93 from the military liaison at Cleveland Center at 10:07. Unaware that the aircraft had already crashed [at 10:03], Cleveland passed to NEADS the aircraft's last known latitude and longitude. NEADS was never able to locate United 93 on radar because it was already in the ground.8
NEADS never lost track of Delta 1989, and even ordered fighter aircraft from Ohio and Michigan to intercept it.9
The 9/11 Commission Report tells us that NORAD’s ground radar tracking capabilities for detecting aircraft originating within the United States was operational on September 11, 2001. Of course, this was no secret. NORAD’s tracking on radar of all aircraft flying within the United States was a matter of public record. As such, any terrorist organization that planned to attack the United States would never have chosen an airborne venue for their operation. Such an operation would have a low probability of success. Any real foreign terrorist attack on the United States would have been confined to the ground or waterways.
Thanks to The 9/11 Commission Report’s assessment of NORAD on September 11, 2001, we now know two things:
1. For the first time we have verifiable proof that a grand conspiracy exits to cover up the identity of the real perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks; and
2. PM has shown itself to be a witting tool for the elements within the Federal government who carried out the 9/11 attacks.
This is the breakthrough the 9/11 Truth Movement has been waiting for for over eight years now; positive proof that the attacks on September 11, 2001 were staged false-flag events. It should not surprise anyone that the NORAD angle of 9/11 Truth would be the initial catalyst that overturned the official version of what transpired on September 11, 2001. After all, the NORAD angle of 9/11 Truth is the only angle that had an extensive written history going back long before September 11, 2001 that explained exactly what NORAD’s missions were.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=1
2. http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=3
3. http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/sept_11/911Report.pdf
4. http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/airdef/arsr-4.htm
5. http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/sept_11/911Report.pdf, Page 18.
6. Ibid, Page 20.
7. Ibid, Page 27.
8. Ibid, Page 30.
9. Ibid, Page 28.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief DNotice.org
Washington, DC
CD is by far our strongest most supportable evidence.
That having been said, supporting CD as our best evidence is NOT mutually exclusive of other strong evidence such as NORAD's ever changing story. It does not have to be one or the other, you can support both CD evidence and NORAD failure evidence in your presentations along with a number of other powerful pieces of evidence.
You said "Tell me where can one find support for CD in mainstream literature? Zero." as though the fact that MSM is ignoring CD evidence somehow makes it less important or valid evidence. Quite the reverse is true. Since the MSM is studiously ignoring CD evidence, with very few exceptions, we can conclude that it is very powerful evidence indeed. The fact they do ignore it is itself proof of it's potency. Keep in mind the MSM's job with regard to 9/11 is to cover-up the truth, confuse the masses so they don't discover the truth, and promote the 9/11 agenda of endless war. In order to accomplish their task they MUST avoid strong or damning evidence that they cannot rufute. CD is that strong evidence. The fact the MSM avoid it shows us all that they are afraid of it because it has the potential to bring down their entire carefully constructed lie and totally expose them as complicit in the cover-up.
If the MSM does talk about a particular piece of 9/11 evidence you can bet your bottom dollar it is because they feel comfortable refuting it or obfuscating it enough to render it ineffective at swaying public opinion. Take a look at the various hit pieces done on the 9/11 truth movement over the years and you will see they studiously avoid the strongest evidence and focus on dubious evidence and even create straw man arguments. They NEVER take on CD directly point by point. The reason? They will lose and they know it.
Clarification
AtomicBomb,
I agree that CD is the most important aspect of 9/11 Truth, but when discussing 9/11 with a novice on the street or in the office the best tactic is sticking to NORAD (confine it to the new article on NORAD I posted on my website. It's actual proof that NORAD and Popular Mechanics lied), Operation Northwoods, and interviews from persons such as David Schippers (who says three FBI agents came to him six weeks before 9/11 in an attempt to see if Schippers could stop the attacks. The FBI agents gave Schippers the date and the specifics of the attacks). When the novice digests these pieces of immediately verifiable accounts, then he/she will be more open to CD in the WTC.
My point on a mainstream source is that it's better when talking to a novice about 9/11 to start off with a main stream source that confirms 9/11 was an inside job. CD can come later. This brings up NORAD. If you show a novice the quotes in The 9/11 Commission Report I cited in my previous comment (and what better main stream source can one find on the subject of 9/11 then the 9/11 Commission Report!) and then show them the quotes from Popular Mechanics on the same subject, the novice will immediately be shocked by the lies.
I very well know the main stream media cover up CD, however now we have the preeminent mainstream source on 9/11 (The 9/11 Commission Report) saying that NORAD did monitor hijacked American aircraft originating within the United States on 9/11. That means the novice will immediately be able to see that NORAD and Popular Mechanics lied. CD just takes a lot of man hours of research to convince oneself that there is a cover up going on, while The NORAD Papers VI article is immediate verification that a cover up is in progress.
When you’re on the street talking to novices about 9/11 Truth, time is precious, and you have to make every contact count. NORAD and Operation Northwoods accomplishes this perfectly. CD doesn’t. CD is just too complex (unless the novice asks about CD, then you have no choice but to talk about it).
Now back to my incredulity with the ZERO coverage of The NORAD Papers VI article I posted at my website last week. We can all understand why the main stream media would not want to cover CD, but why would 9/11 Blogger hide The NORAD Papers VI article in the blogs section, and 9/11 Truth.org not post the article at all? If it were David Ray Griffin who found those surprising confessions on NORAD in The 9/11 Commission Report, I'm sure it would have been posted everywhere, and he would have been congratulated with "Fantastic catch, Professor Griffin." Am I detecting politics or snobbism within the 9/11 Truth Movement?
Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief DNotice.org
Washington, DC
I will have to agree to disagree with you Brian.
I don't think CD is very complex at all to explain to people on the street. I simply say to them "high tech explosives were found in the WTC dust." and with that you are off and running into a conversation. The issues you choose to present first require a lot more time to develop to a person on the street. Time you most likely will not have. As far as what I tell people about the 911 Commission and MSM goes I usually boil it down about like this: "The 9/11 commission is a laughing stock and even its own commissioners admit it is a tissue of lies." and poof you are off and running on that topic and can quickly mention Farmers book. As to the MSM I start with: "the corporate controlled media is lying to you about 9/11 and virtually everything else that matters." and again you are into a conversation with an opportunity to expand on your presentation.
I just don't think it is all that difficult to explain quickly that "a CSI style investigation was done on the dust from ground zero and they found high tech explosive residue in the dust proving the towers were destroyed by controlled demolition." I don't buy into this idea that CD is so complex that it puts people off or is too difficult for people to understand. I find that excuse for rejecting our best evidence to be extremely weak and quite frankly dubious. CD is easy to explain.
I think what is happening here is that you are mistaking people’s unwillingness to face a difficult truth (cognitive dissonance) with confusion over the material you are presenting to them. People on the street are not confused by what I say about CD for example, some of them just don't want to believe it. The same problem exists with any evidence you present, be it NORAD or the lack of debris in Shanksville, or whatever evidence you favor to start a conversation with.
The issue is not one of confusion about the evidence it is one of psychological resistance to a very uncomfortable truth..
What Could Be Easier?
AtomicBomb,
the big problem with the WTC dust is the chain of evidence. Where did it come from? Was the dust intentionally contaminated by persons playing a trick on the 9/11 Truth Movement? When novices get back home and do research on what you've told them about the WTC dust, they then will check out what the shill sites have to say on the topic, and we're back to square one. With the latest article on NORAD that I wrote, there is no such shill counter argument. The official narrative of what happened on 9/11 IS The 9/11 Commission Report, and what does the commission report say about NORAD's radar tracking capabilities of domestic hijacked aircraft originating within the United States on 9/11:
-- NORAD would receive tracking information for the hijacked aircraft either from joint use radar or from the relevant FAA air traffic control facility. Every attempt would be made to have the hijacked aircraft squawk 7500 to help NORAD track it.
F-15 fighters were scrambled at 8:46 from Otis Air Force Base. But NEADS did not know where to send the alert fighter aircraft, and the officer directing the fighters pressed for more information: "I don't know where I'm scrambling these guys to. I need a direction, a destination." Because the hijackers had turned off the plane's transponder, NEADS personnel spent the next minutes searching their radar scopes for the primary radar return. American 11 struck the North Tower at 8:46. Shortly after 8:50, while NEADS personnel were still trying to locate the flight, word reached them that a plane had hit the World Trade Center.
Controllers at NEADS located an unknown primary radar track, but "it kind of faded" over Washington. The time was 9:38.The Pentagon had been struck by American 77 at 9:37:46.The Langley fighters were about 150 miles away.
NEADS first received a call about United 93 from the military liaison at Cleveland Center at 10:07. Unaware that the aircraft had already crashed, Cleveland passed to NEADS the aircraft's last known latitude and longitude. NEADS was never able to locate United 93 on radar because it was already in the ground.8
NEADS never lost track of Delta 1989, and even ordered fighter aircraft from Ohio and Michigan to intercept it. --
Open and shut proof on the NORAD question from the preeminent mainstream source on 9/11, which just so happens to coincide with the 9/11 Truth Movement's assessment of NORAD's monitoring capabilities on the morning of September 11. 2001. What could be easier for a 9/11 Truth activist propagating on the street or in the office?
Simply put: when it comes to CD, it's a matter of we say, they say. However, when it comes to NORAD, it's a matter of we say the same thing they say! See how simple that is?
Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief DNotice.org
Washington, DC
The chain of custody is addressed in the Harrit paper.
What we say about CD is provable and true and what they say about CD is unprovable and false. Again not hard for people to understand.
I say go for it Brian if you think the NORAD stuff is the best, knock yourself out. Please don't try and tell me that because JREFers and their ilk will put out disinformation about the chain of evidence for CD that it is therefore weak somehow. Disinformation about the chain of evidence has been addressed and in no way weakens the CD evidence. Furthermore JREFers will put out disinformation about all the NORAD evidence you favor as well. They lie, and they lie about everything including NORAD, get used to it.
I am not going to let the fact that disinformation is put out about CD prevent me from talking about it, NO WAY SIR that dog don't hunt! In fact the disinformation swarming around the CD topic proves to me that it is the greatest and most feared threat to our opposition or else why would they devote so much time and effort to it? The more time they devote to lying about a particular point such as CD the more dangerous it is to them in their own minds. Think about that. Take on disinformation directly Brian don't let the mere fact that it is out there steer you away from our best evidence. If you do allow disinformation to steer your actions you are giving the opposition a victory.
9/11 Truth and The Psychology of Street Activism
AtomicBomb,
again CD can take many hours of private research to determine what is what, and even then many won't come to the conclusion (as you and I have) that CD took place in the towers.
The Harrit paper was written because there is a problem with the chain of evidence. The paper itself doesn't positively fix that problem, it spotlights the problem.
JREFers CAN'T put out disinformation on The 9/11 Commission Report. It's THEIR source; it's their Bible! That's the beauty of the NORAD angle. Whoever wrote the passages dealing with NORAD in the commission report (it couldn't have been Zelikow, because he would have immediately excised the incriminating passages), he/she missed the passages in the report where NEADS personnel are tracking on radar Flight 77 and Delta 1989 and searching their radar for Flights 11 and 93!). JREFers are checkmated, with nothing to say.
Why would anyone want to start off with CD when initially informing a novice about 9/11 Truth when the NORAD and Operation Northwoods' angles are FACT even in the mainstream literature? NORAD and Operation Northwoods are one-two knock out blows for immediately opening the novice's eyes, leading that novice to check out CD.
Psychologically speaking, because the novice to 9/11 Truth has first been shown NORAD and Operation Northwoods, that person immediately sees both of those two angles of 9/11 Truth being immediately confirmed on the street using mainstream literature, not 9/11 Truth literature, hence, the novice sees the person talking to them as both honest and factual. That novice will then research CD in the WTC without any suspicion that they were being lied to on the street by 9/11 Truthers (How many reading this have run into LaRouche supporters on the street, and don't know whether to trust them. That's the same feeling many novices have of Truthers, unless they are immediately convinced we are speaking verifiable truth when we are talking to them.). The novice later researches CD knowing that 9/11 Truthers are honest and have honest concerns about what really happened on 9/11. This is a powerful psychological method that eases and reassures the mind of the novice when the novice later researches other aspects of 9/11 Truth, including CD.
When the novice is researching CD later, the positive psychological impact of proper street action will unconsciously affirm in the novice’s mind that CD is real. In other words, the novice won’t be researching CD to determine if CD happened, the novice will be researching CD to learn more about the FACT of CD! Cute, huh?
It is my opinion that the 9/11 Truth Movement needs to incorporate elements of psychology when dealing with novices on the street. The Federal government/Intelligence Community use psychology for their purposes. We in the Truth Movement better start using psychology to more effectively counter the lies.
Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief DNotice.org
Washington, DC
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Addendum
The title of my response to a comment made by Adam Syed last week was "Don't Be Afraid Of Your Shadow" (http://www.911blogger.com/node/22471#comment). Well, here we have another example of the 9/11 Truth Movement not only being afraid of its shadow, but willing to cut off its nose to spit its face. I can only assume that the reason no one has provided one comment to The NORAD Papers VI article is because the source of the astounding admissions on NORAD's tracking capabilities within the United States found in the article comes from The 9/11 Commission Report. Well, guys, you can't stick your heads in the sand just because The 9/11 Commission report admitted what everyone knew about NORAD before 9/11 (see my previous five articles on NORAD at www.DNotice.org). It was no secret that NORAD tracked all aircraft within the United States before 9/11, but it is a CRIME for NORAD in a criminal investigation to LIE about its true capabilities. In 2004 the Air Force said:
"Before 2001, 1st Air Force was charged with keeping an eye on the nation’s borders, usually looking for threats in the form of Russian aircraft skirting too close for comfort to the mainland. In those few hours, the command’s mission went from looking outward to looking inward."
(http://usmilitary.about.com/od/airforce/a/airdefense.htm)
In 2008 NORAD said:
"Since the tragic events of 9/11, NORAD’s role which previously was outward-looking now includes monitoring airspace within North America."
(http://web.archive.org/web/20080103124933/http://www.norad.mil/50/nutshe...)
Then we have the Popular Mechanics lie:
"Why couldn't ATC find the hijacked flights? When the hijackers turned off the planes' transponders, which broadcast identifying signals, ATC had to search 4500 identical radar blips crisscrossing some of the country's busiest air corridors. And NORAD's sophisticated radar? It ringed the continent, looking outward for threats, not inward. "It was like a doughnut," Martin says [Major Douglas Martin, public affairs officer for NORAD]. "There was no coverage in the middle." Pre-9/11, flights originating in the States were not seen as threats and NORAD wasn't prepared to track them."
(http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=3)
So here we have the government (NORAD and the Air Force) lying about their abilities on 9/11, which is a crime (we have also caught red-handed Popular Mechanics assisting NORAD and the Air Force in this crime), but what does the 9/11 Truth Movement do....NOTHING, because, God forbid, The 9/11 Commission Report shouldn't be seen telling the truth!
People, this is no way to win. This is a recipe for failure. Utter failure. Two government agencies have been caught in a lie, and all you can do is act like a little child and ignore the opportunity to attack. Why? Because Philip Zelikow forgot to excise the incriminating evidence in the commission report, and let remain in the text golden opportunities for the 9/11 Truth Movement to demolish the official 9/11 narrative. If you allow this opportunity that has been handed to you on a silver platter to languish, then there is NO way you will ever prevail.
Controlled Demolition is a Fact
The controlled demolition hypothesis is well supported by video analysis, basic physics principles, and laboratory investigations on ground zero dust samples. It is reasonable to conclude that controlled demolition of the WTC is a fact.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Go Easy
JohnnyMo,
most people don't take or know physics, and why should they trust what Professor Jones says? Why not let people come to what felled the WTC after you give them verifiable/documented evidence like that found in the NORAD papers?
Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief DNotice.org
Washington, DC
I support evidenced based
I support evidenced based arguments. If you want to learn about the physical arguments relating to the 9/11 destruction check out the following:
http://911physicstruth.wetpaint.com/
http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCPJ/2009/00000002/000000...
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Preaching To The Faithful
JohnnyMo,
I don't need convincing.
Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief DNotice.org
Washington, DC
There is more than one path to 911 truth
CD is one of the most effective.
For people who understand the laws of physics you can go there first and get to 911 truth fast and easy.
The laws of physics do not lie. Governments lie.
The truth can be shown to be obvious.
There is more than one path to 911 truth
Thank you.
Waitew: This is your "About
Waitew: This is your "About me" statement from your 9//11 Blogger information page
About Me
When I saw the towers go down my first thought was,"how did they get that many bombs in there unnoticed".Then the TV experts came out & said,"there probably weren't any explosives involved" & I thought ,"yeah,right!".I knew they were lying then & I kept asking myself,"why are they lying?why are they lying?"The only thing I could come up with is that they were lying to avoid the embarrasment of having to admit the 'terrorists' were able to sneak that many bombs into the buliding right under their noses.Then I forgot about for a couple years.
It wasn't until in a post on a blog (I don't even remember which one) on a subject not related to 911 that 911 somehow got brought up & someone posted something about the buildings falling at the acceleration rate of gravity.Remembering my highschool science class I thought,'that's impossible' so,I set out to prove it wasn't true & it sort of unravelled from there.When I look back to the days right after 911 & how I wondered why they were lying I'm apalled at just how naive I was for the thought that they themselves might have done it never crossed my mind! I know better now.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
You Are You, So Don't Impute!
JohnnyMo,
if most people were like you there would have been no need for a 9/11 Truth Movement. Don't make the fatal mistake by imputing to others your power of perception/knowledge.
Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief DNotice.org
Washington, DC
>>The 911truth movement by
>>The 911truth movement by those who push a narrow focus (CD,CIT flyover,no plane,space beam etc.)
You mean like the most successful group in the history of the movement, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, who now have over 1000 architects and engineers signed onto their petition for a new investigation?
It's fascinating that you are grouping demolition in with nonsense. As it turns out, the demolition scientists are the ones who did the work to debunk false claims like space weapons. But it sounds like you've never read the Journal of 9/11 Studies.
correct and incorrect narrow focus
I am surprised to see CD (controlled demolition) lumped together with flyover, no plane, space beam etc. I trust it was just an oversight. I see CD as the foundation on which the study of 9/11 is most safely built.
It is good to focus narrowly on CD initially because it is scientifically provable by robust methods. Not until you have shown your audience that explosives were used can you move on to show that NIST was lying about the mechanism of collapse. Not until you show that NIST is lying can you argue that some elements of the US administration were complicit in a false flag attack.
The "big picture" in fact is based on three steps in sequence: proof of CD, proof NIST lied, proof of complicity.
The beauty of this view is its adequacy - despite its simplicity it makes the case on its own. Any person or group wishing to pursue more complex issues, like the deficiencies of the 9/11 Commission report, should first make sure their audience is grounded in these three steps.
The free fall of WTC 7 is particularly valuable as the evidence is in the hands of the public in the form of videos and can never be taken away or disputed by supporters of the official story.
And I'm surprised
to see you lumping flyover in with "no planes" and space beams.
Clearly you don't have the ability to discern actual disinfo from non disinfo.
For the record
I believe the panelist who answered the offensive question was Ashley Smith, of the International Socialist Review, not Glen Ford. Someone correct me if I'm mistaken.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
They Both Spoke
Although all Ford did was to take the mike and then demur to Smith. Mr. Plant was one of a team of three clean-cut young guys who sat together and looked like they weren't enjoying things very much... Hope they got some OT pay, LOL.
911 Truthers partly responsible for their isolation
911 Truth is what I call a "high strangeness" topic - it runs counter to our education and conditioning. Hence, when people hear about it, there's a tendency for kneejerk rejection. However, 911 truther suggestions of MIHOP or LIHOP become far less strange when viewed from within the context of other false flag operations. Thus, it seems a common-sense matter to me that 911 truth activists who do education should do so more broadly.
Unsurprisingly, when I have written similarly at JREF, the 'debunkers' have nothing good to say about my suggestion. When it's not completely avoided, the usual 'talking point' type response seemed to be that I am trying to "poison the well". Funny, but the JREF'ers don't hesitate to look for historical analogies whenever it suits their purpose. (Also, I thought "poisoning the well" was deliberately introducing some bogus or unlikely pseudo-explanation into a discussion; or else deliberately introducing some bogus evidence or reprehensible witness into a case. I am talking about introducing historical facts that point to a false flag attack.)
As I suggested at JREF, in a thread entitled "What Do JREF'ers Think Would be Optimal Messaging for WE ARE CHANGE?", I wish that We ARe Change (WAC) would broaden their messaging. It'd be hard to tell, precisely, if it sparked more research on the part of passers-by, but I think it extremely likely. As I wrote in another recent thread of mine at JREF, called Nice meta-summary of "conspiranoia" as social control, implications for 911 activists*
* This same essay was submitted to 911blogger, but after an initial, positive response from the mods requesting a minor edit, they have apparently dropped the ball.
http://www.DemocracyABC.org
http://www.therealnews.com
http://www.pdamerica.org
my advice........
...is get OFF of the JREF forum, its crawling with spooks, and get out in front of your local library with free copies of Press for Truth or Zero. Sucking us into these wacked-out forums is a drain of useful talent
Or "In Their Own Words"
Or "In Their Own Words"
"Core of Corruption"
"Between_ the_ Lies"
"The New American Century"
Opportunities Abound!
Our group is at around 40,000 discs
Tonight I will be presenting to a group called "College of Complexes" at at local cafeteria
THE UNDERWEAR BOMBER: MORE TO THE STORY
I have prepared a 35 minute video comp from youtube videos, and have a bunch of notes. The average attendance is 20-40 intelligent people.
Highland Park Cafeteria
300 Casa Linda Plaza
1200 North Buckner Blvd.
Dallas, TX 75119
Joe will present some lesser known FACTS about the Christmas Underwear Bomber.
A Free DVD to all who attend
Weekly Free Speech Forum
Established February 28, 2009
Dallas Campus of the
College of Complexes
The Playground for People Who Think
Sustaining the Academic Tradition of Listening to:
"Only One Fool at a Time"
www.collegeofcomplexes.org/2.html
February 6th Meeting #30
The Underwear Bomber
On Christmas Day a lone "terrorist" was arrested for attempting to ignite his underwear to blow up an airplane from Amsterdam bound for Detroit. Or so the story goes. Is there more to the story? Questions abound. Was there an accomplice? Were others arrested? Was there foreknowledge? Is there a cover up? Is this just the latest in a long line of False-Flag Psy-Ops. Joe Stokes will answer these questions and more. All attending will receive FREE DVDs exploring these issues.
The College of Complexes, a weekly free speech forum on social issues and current events, is holding meetings in Dallas every Saturday at 6:00 PM, at the Highland Park Cafeteria, 300 Casa Linda Plaza, 1200 North Buckner. The college, which is subtitled “The Playground for People Who Think,” features a special guest speaker each week, followed by a period for questions from the audience. Then everyone in attendance is afforded time at the podium to speak during the “Rebuttal / Remarks” segment of the program. The speaker is afforded an opportunity at the end to respond to the comments. So as to maintain some semblance of order, the college enforces its rule of listening to “Only One Fool at a Time.”
Tuition is $3.00 to help defray costs. The college maintains no membership, volunteer operated, and all meetings are open to the public. No reservations are required.. The Highland Park Cafeteria is located at the intersection of Buckner Blvd. (Rte Loop 12) and Garland Road (Rte 78), in the East Quadrant, Casa Linda Shopping Center, next to Albertsons. Parking is free, and bus service is available. The college meets in the Shakespeare Room.
The original College of Complexes was established in Chicago, IL, in 1951, and has been meeting weekly continuously since that time, claiming to “solve all the world’s problems.” The name is derived from a psychiatric disorder, a repressed need to express ideas. Speakers must advance a point of view, or take a position on an issue. Lectures on topics are discouraged, since “the college is not a classroom.” It recently celebrated its 3,000th meeting. As to why meetings are numbered, no one has any idea, since it has no significance whatsoever.
good choice
I think the subject of "false flag" is a good choice for this type of forum, and a great use of your time and talent, far better than wasting it over at the JREF mudpit. Report back on how it goes over.
It's not so bad
You just have to take a lot of baths, to wash off the slime.
Also, JREF'ers can and do make good arguments and dig up relevant facts. You have to dig for them, but they are there.
http://www.DemocracyABC.org
http://www.therealnews.com
http://www.pdamerica.org
"Also, JREF'ers can and do
"Also, JREF'ers can and do make good arguments and dig up relevant facts. You have to dig for them, but they are there."
Even a broken clock is right twice a day. :)
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
GREAT line!
Please Folks!!!
This story is about what Barrie Zwicker understood from the weekend. And Barrie's advice to us...
So if we're gonna start listing the titles we hand out, then I have to say that in my experience, Barrie's own "THE GREAT CONSPIRACY" has always been at the top of my list for introducing people to the idea that false flag terror events are committed to keep them in fear so they will obey. I've burned more of those than any other. Sure, the others have their place, and I often make combination packages, but THE GREAT CONSPIRACY is the best primer there is, and he has structured as a news show, which is what TV watchers are familiar and comfortable with.
When I apologized for burning and giving out so many copies of his title without asking first, he smiled and instructed me to keep doing it.
THANK YOU BARRIE!
I've given away hundreds of
...the 911 News Special You Never Saw.
It Is EXCELLENT!
http://www.greatconspiracy.ca/
HERE IT IS.
The Great Conspiracy - The 911 News Special You Never Saw
1:10:22 - 3 years ago
An Indepth Look Into The Attacks On America, And How We May Have To Accept The Shocking Truth That The U.S Government Had A Hand In The Atrocities... A Truley Moving Documentry.
Deprogramming the Public...
Zwicker is a master deprogrammer. Thanks for posting that, Joe. It has been a while since I last saw this. Great introduction for anyone new..... It's the best treatment of Operation Northwoods ever. I'd love to have (14:00 min.- 23:17 min.) as a youtube clip!
...and outside High Schools...outside-inside subway stations...
..outside football and baseball stadiums [at all levels]...out side concert halls...outside theaters...outside performance art centers...outside places of worship...at busy pedestrian intersections during lunch hours or weekends...
There are a million places to be...and there are some that are comfortable for each of us...
CI...Civil Informationing has been fine tuned by the 9/11 Truth Movement...and one of its principal concepts is:
Go to where the people are...and be "present" with the TRUTH...
Make a banner or hand held sign that is "thought provocative" with YOUR own words...and one that can be held above a crowd...and at a size somewhere between WAC-LA's "flying TRUTH wings"...and the usual smallish hand held stuff that is overused right now.
I use two paper covered foam boards glued together at three edges forming a pocket into which I slide a 1" X 2-1/2" board cut to about four feet in length...and then I staple the foam board onto the post...I then paint the entire foam board on both sides for weatherproofing...and then paint what words that I want to express. I always have a "9/11 Truth for World Peace" message on one side or on one panel. There are about six at this time and I use the one appropriate to my CI...Civil Infirmationing location that day...and I keep changing some of the wording to keep up-to-date with what's happening in politics etc.
My latest words on the opposite side that I use for sporting events:
SKATE
BOARDING
not
WATER
BOARDING
Its a "hook" with a point...and it works!
another:
MORE
SPORTS
stop
WAR
another for outdoor summer events or busy street corners:
GREEN
ENERGY
JOBS
NOT WAR
and for the 11th of every month:
ITS THE
11th [a very tall 11]
STAND UP
and on Veteran's and Memorial Days:
SUPPORT
VETS
STOP
WAR
[ the above two are on opposite sides of the same foamboard ]
If someone bites, I have a simple 1/4 page handout steering folks to websites and dvds etc.
[Its all I can afford...]
Here is a question that tests your "age of activism":
Would your prefer ONE million person march once per year...or
A MILLION one person marches ?
If you answered the former...you are a last century peace activist...and should have your burial plot planned out...
If you answered the latter, you "get" what the 9/11 Truth for Peace Movement is all about...and you have an interesting "kick-ass" life in front of you...no matter how old you are...
Its 2010 and NOT 1970...SPREAD OUT...MORE OFTEN...GO TO THE PEOPLE...
9/11 TRUTH for World PEACE and JUSTICE
Robin Hordon
Kingston, WA
JREF is the wrong gang to hang with...except if you are doing your own cointelpro towards them...rdh
JREF is sapping your energy.
The JREFers if they cannot change your mind or get you to believe lies about 9/11 will do the next best thing which is to waste your time and drain your energy. They will draw you into endless arguments and insult exchanges so you have less time and energy to talk to average people on the street who you might actually reach. Peace is right JREF is filled with spooks some of whom probably get paid to do what they do.
Barrie hits the nail on the head!! Fantastic article!
There are also some great quote-like statements in this well written piece.
"Splittists" <--I like that term. "...planted agents of the state – spooks -- whose instructions are to do this splitting. The Chinese call such agents “splittists.”
"...Followers in the anti-war movement “do not realize,” as Paul Craig Roberts wrote Sept. 15th, 2009, in Information Clearing House, “that by accepting the [government’s] 9/11 explanation they have undermined their own opposition to the war. Once you accept that Muslim terrorists did it, it is difficult to oppose punishing them for the event. [Anti-war activists] do not understand that if you grant the government its premise for war, it is impossible to oppose the war.”
This is kind of a cool phrasing: "...Consumers of corporate news media... ...are embedded in a state of excited delirium of knowinglessness.” i.e. ...are embedded in a confused or delusional mental state of not really perceiving, of not really being concious of what is.
Cindy Sheehan Discarded Proves.....
TomT,
Roberts' logic is flawless. Of course, the leaders of the Peace Movement knew that their movement made no sense logically. It was political, used to bash Bush. One proof of this is how they used Cindy Sheehan when Bush was in Power. Once the Democrats won the election, Cindy was persona non grate, and the Peace Movement was reigned in. You won't see any mass marches/protests in Washington, DC as long as a Democrat is president. The Peace Movement is a fraud, like the Republican's Tea Parties.
Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief DNotice.org
Washington, DC
Big Action Planned For May 20th
This was one of the topics that the boston get-together was convened to plan. See you there
Not quite
I've encountered opponents of war who would differ with Roberts. They are antiwar, while still 'grant[ing] the government its premise for war,' in that they either believe the official story, or claim it doesn't matter whether the government's story of 9/11 is true or false, because they oppose the war regardless. Essentially, their view seems to be that people should be opposing these wars as wrong no matter what the truth is about 9/11.
Of course, this is a copout on their part. If one is truly determined to stop these wars, then one must grapple with how the warmakers have been able not only to start them but also to maintain support for / neutralize opposition to them. I think something 9/11 truth activists can say in response in such situations is--what about the alleged WMD in Iraq? Would invading Iraq have been the right thing to do even if it turned out the Bush administration's claimes about WMD had been right? No? Well, that didn't stop opponents of that invasion and occupation from pointing to the falsity of those claims in order to strengthen support for their position, did it?. Now, when it comes to 9/11, here we have a government account that is the overarching premise for all its wars, of which Iraq is just one episode. But somehow, we're supposed to consider it unimportant whether the government's claims regarding this event are accurate? No matter how critical this official story is--if left uncontested--in providing them with justification for continuing these occupations and possibly expanding the wars even further? And you call yourselves 'antiwar activists'?...
Good point
Thanks for this comment. It points to the duplicity of so-called anti-war leaders who make excuse after excuse for not taking a stand on 9/11. Some of them go beyond not taking a stand. For example, the "journalists" among them could chose to simply report dispassionately about the topic of this thread. They don't even have to come down on one side or the other, but simply report on this important internal struggle within the peace movement, giving voice to both sides. But because of cowardice, or worse, their silence is deafening.
It points to the fundamental authoritarianism that lurks beneath the anti-authoritarian facade of today's Left leadership.
Moving the Machine
Most ground up movements have focused largely on building support base for their rational claim of injustice. Most have failed to turn this base/consensus into actual political action.
One reason of course is that to get the government to respond, you are effectively asking the government to respond to the people. In America the government is SUPPOSED to be the people. It is not.
Our government and its policies almost exclusively represent *special interests* who are the real constituents of government. It is not our government, but their government. That we are a government of, for and by the people is an illusion.
Our democracy is an hypocrisy.
How do we get our government to first be what is supposed to be as defined in the constitution and founding documents and then get it to represent the interests of the people, not the special interests.
We need to CLEAN UP government. We need to reform our electoral process so that running for office is a level playing field. We need to limit lobbying which has become legalized bribery... an unethical means that politicians are enriching themselves.
Unless and until government is returned to the people, all movements are not going to be effective. But all movements for social justice need to work together to turn our hypocrisy back to a democracy.
This does not mean that people should not struggle against injustice. It simply means that all struggles will be futile without a government which can respond to the people, which follows the constitution and its guiding principles. We have had a coup d'etat by a group of oligarchs who are and work for the special interests. Some of it has been slow, some of it has been linked to a specific event such as 9/11. But the net effect is that our government has be transformed into a grand illusion which does not practice the principles of the constitution. Naomi Klein has explained how this process works in The Shock Doctrine.
Destroy the hypocrisy and return the democracy.
Politicians who cover up the crime of 9/11 have to be voted out
I agree.
Educating the public about 9/11 and other crimes committed in the interests corporate elite is not enough.
The people who fail to represent their constituents have to be held to account and removed from office.
I was heartened to hear that one supporter of the 9/11 Truth Movement was elected to the New York City Council. That's a good start, and some consolation for the refusual to put the Investigation proposal to a referendum, but there is still a long way to go.
We are going to have Federal elections in Australia this year and I think the Truth Movement here needs to do what it can to hold all the candidates standing to account on 9/11 and related issues.
(Added sbsequently:) Being almost half way through "JFK and the Unspeakable -- Why he died and why it matters", one of the greatest advantages we have is the knowledge of President Kennedy's record in office.
To me, an even bigger lie than the lie that JFK was murdered by a lone crazed gunman is the lie peddled by many on the supposed left that JFK was just as corrupt and just as much a servant of the military industrial complex as the rest. One person who promotes this view is John Pilger. Another who came close was Gore Vidal, whom I heard with my own ears describe JFK, to Australian left gatekeeper Phillip Adams, as a "terrible President", proabably around 12 years ago (I am not altogether sure of the date).
(As Barrie Zwicker said in a recorded video of a meeting in Australia in 2008) the evidence shows, to the contrary, that President Kennedy was that he was a hero and had the best possible motivations. I would go further to say that he may have been the greatest political leader of the twentieth century, if not of all time.
JFK's story shows that it is possible for such people to gain high public office and remain true to their principles.
It proves that people do have choices when they wield power and do not have to meekly go along with the dictates with of the corporate elites. Clearly in JFK's case the choices he made had fatal consequences. However, if progressives back then had grasped what was happening as they should have been able to do, simply by observing what he did and had made that widely known, things could have turned out very differently.
Even if JFK had, nevertheless, been killed, his murderers would have been unmasked and brought to justice and the history of the US and the whole world since then would have been dramatically different and better. But we know that it did not, and we know that we have much of the supposed left to thank for that.
Since that time, the view that all public officeholders who wield any significant power are necessarily corrupt has become an almost universally accepted article of faith by grassroots activists.
Consequently, very few ever run for office. Rather, it is largely left to people who are largely constrained, whether willingly or not, by belonging to corrupt or, at best, badly flawed political parties, to stand for office.
In fact, this view also serves to make the job of well-meaning political leaders much harder and, paradoxically, serves to largely let truly corrupt politicians off the hook.
I think if grass roots activists such as those in the 9/11 Truth Movement applied themselves, it may prove possible to get a lot more good people elected to congress and to office at the state level. How this happens may have to be worked out. It could be through the primaries process within either of the two major parties (although I imagine more likely in the Democrats than in the Republicans), though setting up a new truly broad grassroots political party, or maybe be joining and building up one or more existing smaller political parties such as, perhaps, the Greens.
It may take a little longer to get someone like JFK to be elected President, but someone like President Johnson, who seemed not to have been altogther evil, or even, just possibly, President Obama, may feel emboldened to do the right thing.
Knowing that uncorruptible people like JFK did obtain high office and used that office to achieve an enormous about of good (i.e. preventing the outbreak of WW3 on more than one occasion, just to start) would greatly help in that process.
http://candobetter.org/911truth
"JFK's story shows...
.
...that it is possible for such people to gain high public office and remain true to their principles."
Yeah, and he got his head blown off.
Standing for office need not necessarily lead to co-option
Mokeyboy,
Do you really think anyone, who has not lived on Mars for the last five decades, needs to be reminded that JFK was murdered?
The point remains that one person reached the highest office in the most powerful country on earth and had not become corrupted in the process, as crude left structuralists like Chomsky would have us believe must necessarily occur.
This should be a powerful demonstration to others considering standing for public office in order to make the world a better place that such a course is not necessarily doomed to end in them becoming co-opted by the system they intend to change.
I think the acceptance of the contrary as an article of faith is one of the biggest single factors that has caused most grass-roots political movements of the last five decades to fail.
In most cases, when they came up against political representatives who refused to accept their reasoned and sound arguments simply because those political representatives were in the pockets of corporations, they nearly always failed to challnege the right of those politicians to hold onto office because of that fear.
So, fear by good people of themselves becoming corrupt has allowed the truly corrupt to remain in power.
http://candobetter.org/911truth
Well said Daggett.
I would also point out that the assassination itself is an indication that JFK was doing a great deal of damage to the hidden rulers.
One other point about fear is that some good and honest people do not run for office or make waves because of the fear of being killed like JFK was or MLK was. In allowing that fear to take hold what you are essentially saying is "I will not act against bad people because I am afraid they might hurt me". With that attitude anyone willing to do violence becomes your master and you become their slave. Living like a slave is no life at all, in fact it is worse then death. Don't allow fear of death to make you a slave to evil men.
Yup. Plutocracy, not democracy = systemic corruption
And a systemically corrupt government is not going to be responsive to 911, the peace movement, or much of anything beyond a minimum.
Once you get bad people in the Senate and Presidency, they will approve bad members of the Supreme Court - who are appointed for life. To get good people in the Supreme Court, you therefore have to elect good people to the Senate, and then wait 10 - 40 years!
There's no quick fixes, but what fixes there are involve participating in the electoral process. That is what heartens me about the Tea Party movement. While I'm skeptical of some of their platform - they never seem to mention the enormous waste in our military, e.g., but they want a strong military - they at least are running against the Republican status quo. You can bet that there is a concerted effort, behind the scenes, to co-opt them into the regular, Republican machine.
However, one of their leaders was quoted in the NY Times
That is exactly the correct attitude for dealing with both the Democratic and Republican parties - co-opt them. Or, as Thom Hartmann says, "take them over from the bottom, up." As voting blocs develop that are strong enough to resist being sucked into party machines, they need to be somewhat ruthless in not supporting candidates who displease them, even if they're somewhat closer to them, ideologically, than a candidate from the 'other' party.
They also have to keep in mind that, in a democracy, you never get everything you want. Consequently, at any given time, you probably need to have a small number of core demands that can't be compromised. If you're a purist, and insist that a candidate embrace 50 different policy option, it's likely that a bunch of them will annoy another voter, and even if your candidate gets elected, if they insist on nothing but their extesive agenda, they will end up being isolated in Congress. Not a problem if your vote bloc is big enough, and spans enough states and districts that you can control the outcome of 51% of elections. It's hard to imagine such extreme success, though, without going through lots of intermediate, much more humble stages.
I'm hoping that vote bloc technology makes mainstream parties almost irrelevant, as their consensus policy options are controlled by ordinary citizens. That will also help open up opportunities for 3rd parties.
Here are your legislators 'at work', shmoozing for dollars. According to this documentary, Congress critters spend 1/4 to 1/3 of their time schmoozing with lobbyists.
http://www.DemocracyABC.org
http://www.therealnews.com
http://www.pdamerica.org
In Milwaukee, WI We Are Working Together For Peace & Justice
nausea7543
When the student is ready the teacher will come.
I have worked with Peace Action Wisconsin in Milwaukee for over 3 years and I'm a member of the organization. Our site Take A Stand For 9/11 Truth and our meetup site are listed on their website. They have gotten information from us and we even have a box of disks at their office which we replenish every so often. I show up at some of their events and some members of their organization show up at the events we hold. They have posted some of my events in their newsletter. Below is where we are listed under numbers 7 & 8.
1 American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Cmte
ADC 49
2 American Friends Society Cmte
Friends Society 55
3 Milwaukee Network for Social Change
The Milwaukee Network for Social Change promotes responsible living through participation in direct action at a community level. We believe that as members of the Milwaukee community we share in the responsibility of promoting the ideas of neighborhood partnership, self-sustainability through the re-distribution of excess goods, and fostering positive social relationships that enable the open discussion of cultural, political, environmental and social matters. 80
4 Nonviolent Cow
The name of this web site, Nonviolent Cow (formerly “Nonviolent Worm”), brings together two forces I have experienced in my life: the wonder and power of creation, and the wonder and power of the Spirit, or creative nonviolence. 108
5 Public Allies
Public Allies is a national movement grounded in the conviction that everyone leads. We believe that everyone can make a difference, and work to inspire more citizens to believe in themselves, step up and act. 81
6 US Labor Against the War
Our Principles - To protect our members and the lives and livelihoods of working people everywhere, we will advocate, educate and mobilize in the US labor movement for: a just foreign policy, an end to U.S. occupation of foreign countries, redirecting resources from inflated military spending to meeting the needs of working families, supporting our troops and their families by bringing the troops home, protecting workers' rights, civil rights and liberties and the rights of immigrants, and solidarity with workers and their organizations around the world. 83
7 Take a Stand for 9/11 Truth
Source for information on all things associated with the 9/11 attack. 52
8 Take A Stand For 9/11 Truth Milwaukee & SE Wisc. ts911t.org
Meetup Site for SE Wisconsin ts911t.org
thanks
Thank you, nausea 7543. Your post gives me hope. Bringing these different movements together is like weaving a delicate cloth. it takes skill, perseverance, concentration and care. I'm very happy to know there are people doing this.
High immigration not in the interests of the North American poor
This post seems to implicitly support high immigration into the US when it states, "Our Principles - ... protecting ... the rights of immigrants,"
Whilst this may not be the place for a prolonged debate over immigration, I would like to state for the record that I would be a supporter of the Immigration Reform Movement and, hence, effective border contol, if I lived in North America.
I realise many 9/11 Truth activists feel morally bound to support immigrants' rights and, hence, high immigration whilst many opponents of high immigration have a psychological need to believe that many immigrants are likely to be terrorists and, hence, tend to promote the official account of 9/11.
This has consequently created two somewhat false poles on the political landscape. However, to me high immigration and the so-called "War on Terror" and all the entailed denial of civil liberties are but two sides of the same coin.
Of course, I realise that this may be considered politically incorrect, but I know I am not entirely alone within the 9/11 Truth Movement. Paul Craig Roberts has also gone on record as opposing high immigration.
In Australia, I am also opposed to high immigration. The consequent population growth is obviously the single biggest factor which is destroying both the living standards of the poorest citizens of all of our respective countries and our environment. In the south east of the state of Queensland (normally referred to as SEQ) some expect the iconic koala to become extinct in as little as two years, because their habitat is being subdivided for housing developments to cope with population growth.
High immigration is about inflating the cost of housing for the benefit of land speculators and property developers and providing cheap labour. In Australia, this combination of stratospheric housing costs and low wages has impoverished virtually all unskilled workers and a good many formerly prosperous skilled professionals. One formerly well-off professional in my neighbourhood has likened his current circumstances in which most of his wages go to pay rents hyper-inflated by population growth as 'slavery', and that was before he lost his job. He is now retraining to work in a semi-skilled occupation and I expect in coming years further high immigration, unless it is stopped, will drive down his wages even more.
Some of my thoughts on immigration and those who are driving it can be found in the article "How the growth lobby threatens Australia's future" of 9 January 2009.
http://candobetter.org/911truth
First things first
Not to steal the thread, but I have to interject here. When the U. S. Empire withdraws to its own borders, when the leadership of the anti-immigration movement puts that forth as a just demand, then I would be more inclined to listen to their arguments. As it stands, the U.S. has military bases in 63 countries and military personnel in at least 156 countries:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5564
....not to mention the operations of its intelligence agencies and money lenders.
Until the anti-immigrant movement actively stand up to the forces of empire, I will consider it nothing more principled than nationalist scapegoating.
Support for open borders reactionary, rather than progressive
Firstly, it seems to me that calling for the immediate complete withdrawal of the US Empire to within its own borders may be rather an extreme position even for the peace movement to adopt, let alone groups such as immigration reform groups whose goals, on the surface, appear to be different.
Even if we are all agreed that the US is the principle threat to world peace, I am not sure if it necessarily should follow from that the US should be required to immedidately and unilaterally withdraw from all military bases outside its own borders.
I would suggest it would be more appropriate to focus on calling for the withdrawal of US from parts of the world where US military power clearly poses a threat to other nations well beyond what any need to defend the US itself would justify. This would include at least Central Asia, South Asia, Central Europe, at least most of the Middle East and, of course, Guantanamo Bay. Beyond that, I don't think it would be altogether unreasonable to expect complete withdrawal by the US to be contingent upon a similar total withdrawal by all other large world powers.
Whether or not we can agree, I don't see how the (alleged) failure of leaders of the anti-immigration movement to adopt that extreme position of total immediate withdrawal, should determine whether or not high immigration into the US and Canada is a good idea.
At the moment, California is running out of water, not to mention jobs, yet high rates of immigration into California continue and its population is expected to rise from 40 million to 60 million by mid century. See "Crowded California is running out of water" of 17 July 2009 and "As the drought worsens, California continues a policy of ‘growth-as-usual’" of (on or before) 27 September 2009 both by Mark Cromer on the Californians for Population Stabilization web site.
In the former article, Mark Cromer writes:
"California’s water supplies continue to dwindle even as its population grows, with only half of the expected runoff from the Sierra snowpack materializing in 2007. By last year, just as Los Angeles County closed in on 10 million people, the Sierra runoff was only 40 percent of normal.
"Yet as our critical water supplies in California literally evaporate before our eyes, our elected officials tout more growth, increased immigration and an expanded consumer-driven economy with all the zeal of men and women cocktailing at a Prozac party."
So, what possible sense does it make to increase California's population by an estimated 50% by mid century with corresponding increases across the rest of the US, except, possibly in the short term by those who stand to gain from land speculation, property development and cheap labour?
The article "Bush's Legacy" of 15 October 2007 shows how immigration rose spectacularly in the years of President W's misrule. At the same time, fellow warmonger, Australian Prime Minister John Howard, similarly, and very deceptively, raised Australia's immigration rate to record levels. (See "Back-scratching at a national level" of 13 July 2007 and "An inconvenient truth about rising immigration" of 3 March 2008.)
In Australia, another group who enthusiastically embrace high immigration are the same far left who zealously uphold the Official Myth of 9/11 in the way that Barrie Zwicker has described.
So, I think a few Truth activists may need to re-examine the view that support for open borders is somehow progressive.
To repeat what I wrote above, I consider high immigration and the so-called "War on Terror" to be merely two sides of the same coin.
Could I also commend "Free Trade, Open Immigration Dogmas Must Be Rethought" of 16 August 2007 by Paul Craig Roberts?
http://candobetter.org/911truth
I want to commend your group. Great truthactions!
You guys do great!! Keep up the good work. Successful groups operate like this.
North Texans for 9/11 Truth
http://www.northtexas911truth.com/
Somewhat off topic but
I hope Zwicker got the message that the section of Ganser's book about the Gorgopotamos bridge in Greece was riddled with major errors. So many that it could not have been a mistake. Somebody, somewhere, injected disinformation. (Zwicker had referred to Ganser's book in a lecture, and last I heard, was working on a book on false flag operations.)
http://www.DemocracyABC.org
http://www.therealnews.com
http://www.pdamerica.org
Great talk by Prof. MacQueen
I forwarded the video link to all my contacts in the peace movement and ISM.
Also, very intelligent quote by Paul Craig Roberts.
Moving forward: peace and 9/11 truth not "vs"
Yes I've been sending the MacQueen video to everyone. The biggest problem with the 9/11 truth movement is that it is seen as fringe. Similar to what Barrie said, the best way to make it mainstream is to make peace a major issue for 9/11 truth groups and have 9/11 truth a major issue for peace groups. Time to "mix and mingle"! Step out of the box a bit. If you are often preaching to the choir it may be time to try a new audience. Also, don't use the term "truthers", that in itself identifies you as fringe. Do peace activists call themselves "peacers"? Both terms sound silly. We are activists for 9/11 truth, peace, equality, fair media, environmentalism, justice, and everything else under the sun.
The MacQueen video is a great way to break the ice. Peace!
Cindy Sheehan and Dr Dahlia Wasfi
will be speaking at the Treason In America conference in Valley Forge, PA, March 6-7.
Some people in the 9/11 truth movement have really been working hard recently to help bridge the gap to the anti-war movement.
If you dont know, now you know-- get there if you can, and bring someone whos not in the choir.
www.treasoninamericaconference.com
________________________
The key to successful truth actions lies in not insulting your target audience or promoting speculation as hard fact.
Too bad WE ARE CHANGE doesn't have a college affiliation program
Imagine if We Are Change helped start chapters in colleges across the US. ( In fact, why don't they start a fraternity - they've already got 3 letters!! :-) )
Were such a collections of WAC student clubs or fraternities already in place, they could have had presentations of live video from the Treason in America conference fed into rooms they had set up in colleges across the country. Net result: exposure to the Treason in America presentations could have increased 1,000-fold.
As I've recently written, I think We Are Change is the best thing to come out of the 911 Truth movement, so far. Still, they could push the basic idea a LOT further.
http://www.DemocracyABC.org
http://www.therealnews.com
http://www.pdamerica.org
I submitted a blog, challenging WAC to create college branches
I just created a new blog, which I hope gets front-paged, challenging WAC to set up college branches and maybe even a fraternity. (They already have 3 letters, they just need to figure out Greek equivalents. :-) )
http://www.DemocracyABC.org
http://www.therealnews.com
http://www.pdamerica.org
Metamars,
GREAT idea! I hope someone in WAC follows up on it.
Thanks
I do, too.
One thing WAC students could do on camera is accost members of the Democratic and Republic clubs on campus, and ask them pointed questions about the lack of prosecution of high-level war criminals, etc. (I.e., since elites will not normally be walking around most college campuses, they will have to set their sights lower, but it could still be all to the good. Well, "all to the good" if they eschew the finger pointing and blanket assignations of guilt that they sometimes do.)
Also, WAC needs to learn, as well as teach. E.g., apparently they espouse the view that the Democrats and Republicans are just an elaborate facade. While Dems and Repubs act as wings of a single war/corporatist party, they are no more identical than 2 rival crime families which engage in similar activities, but also compete with each other for booty and influence. Even a light reading of political history should demolish the notion of 'nothing but an elaborate facade'.
http://www.DemocracyABC.org
http://www.therealnews.com
http://www.pdamerica.org
JREF'ers voted 21:1 against WAC success w/ college branches
I had added a poll to my JREF thread, entitled If WAC sets up college branches and a fraternity, will they succeed?. The JREF'ers overwhelmingly think that WAC will fail, if it attempts to set up college clubs.
Well, that's probably the best indication, yet, that WAC can make a go of this!
http://www.DemocracyABC.org
http://www.therealnews.com
http://www.pdamerica.org
Our door is open. And theirs?
I think some of the most critical points in Barrie Zwicker's article are right there at the beginning--articulating what I think many in the 9/11 truth movement have preceived for some time now:
'There is a split but it has not been initiated, nor is it maintained, by members of the 9/11Truth movement....The split is unilateral from the anti-war movement’s side, especially from leaders and organizers.'
This isn't to say that the 9/11 truth movement has no reason to be self-critical. But before one can correct a problem, one has to get the diagnosis right. There have simply been too many examples for us to ignore of the willful shunning of a movement whose pertinence to the antiwar cause should be as obvious as the mid-day sun.
Thanks for posting this very inspirational article!
My favorite quote:
". . . Once you accept that Muslim terrorists did it, it is difficult to oppose punishing them for the event. [Anti-war activists] do not understand that if you grant the government its premise for war, it is impossible to oppose the war.”
Yes thank you
I was at both of the events, and Barrie pretty much hit the nail on the head about how the 9-11 truthers were recieved on Saturday. The main event broke up into smaller discussion groups a couple of times with different topics being in different rooms. The discussion group about 9-11 led by Paul Zarembka and Barrie Zwicker was excellent, but preaching to the choir. There were only two people in that group that weren't already truthers. I really feel the negative comments in the main panel about 9-11 not being a worthwhile issue for the Peace Movement stopped a lot of people from wanting to go to the group and learn about 9-11. It was like 9-11 had a social stigmatization within the Peace Community.
The most upsetting part of the article was how Barrie was subjected to calumny by people calling him a Right Wing Extremist. I don't know his political views, I don't even care. If a right wing extremist is for the truth about 9-11 then I would welcome them. I kinda agree with Alex Jones about the Left-Right Paradigm. That's not the issue, it's that someone would deliberately lie to make people dislike him.
Observations from the New England Peace Conference at MIT 1/30
Friends of Peace...
When I noted that there were several 9/11 Truthers and 9/11 Truth organizations scheduled to attend, support or present at the above mentioned Peace Conference, I felt it important that I attend to observe and talk about "9/11 TRUTH for World PEACE and JUSTICE"...an expanded vision of what I think that the 9/11 Truth Movement might be able to help facilitate worldwide. Having attended several other such "peace" events in the Seattle area...and local-regional meetings and planning sessions and peace actions...and having been SHUNNED at each and every one of them because I was a 9/11 Truther, I found this opportunity full of interest if not promise. Until I got there.
Without building my credentials about having "radar" regarding such meetings [I lived in and around Harvard Square-Cambridge, MA for most of my activist life], and after suffering through the event itself, I believe that the 9/11TM was set up to be beaten down. Of particular note, is that of the three major 9/11 Truth "presenters" [Scott, Zwicker and Zarembka], two of them are Chomsky's strong critics regarding not only the events of 9/11 but otherwise also.
My first contact when entering to set up my 9/11 TRUTH for World PEACE banner, I got an immediate cold shoulder...
When the conference began and Q+As started, the very first person called upon was a military looking fellow, but dressed up as a young activist fellow whose very first question was about 9/11.
This seemed an obvious and quick choice by the moderator [I've seen this process before as we all have I'm sure]. Additionally, I got a chance to speak with this shill, looked him right in the eye and stated that it was rather obvious about who he was and what the plan was...and he and his little friend left the facility and were not seen again.
Soon a fellow named Smith came up to answer the 9/11 question, for which he was unqualified as to "facts", he confirmed our rights for free speech but then roasted the 9/11TM in the best of the Chomsky-Zinn ways...that of 9/11 being irrelevant, too narrowly focused and a distraction to the "real" work that needed to be accomplished. This fellow led the crowd into emotionally dismissing the 9/11TM even though we were between 10-20% of the attendees. Ironically, when I talked to him after he has no patriotism as he is a citizen of the world...HMMM?
From that time on, although I and other Truthers had raised hands hoping to get to the MIC to speak in support of 9/11 Truth, there was a clear pattern of avoiding our voices. There were NO DOUBTS that such non-selections were deliberate as most of us were fairly well identifiable as Truthers.
The reason that I mention this is because its virtually the IDENTICAL set of words and processes defining each rejection of 9/11 Truth at each peace gathering that I have been associated with. I found it quite astonishing actually.
Peter Dale Scott's brilliant and challenging words [in good "step-it-up" tradition] were indeed broken by a "technical phone glitch" at certain important points, but this most likely was indeed a technical glitch [Barrie certainly adds to this coincidental happening]. Still, with a combination of himself speaking his words and one of the hosts? reading his words into the MIC at the podium, Peter's message made it through...and I do feel that it had impact. Peter spoke directly about what he and Chomsky had in common, and did not have in common...and Peter paid due respect to Zinn using some of the positive and forward thinking words that Zinn had uttered or written about peace in general.
As I had now come to expect, Danny Schechter [sp] soon took the podium in the Q+As and undermined Peter's position of speaking about Chomsky when Chomsky wasn't in attendance. A cheap shot at Peter while complaining about cheap shots!
However, Danny did make an overidding point later on during the Q+As. He asked everyone to note what the average age of the attendeees was...answer-old! And in speaking with him later on, he also KNOWS that the youth are plugged in...THANKFULLY...and that the kids get it.
Another interesting coincidence is that I bumped into another attendee whom I had met years ago and he was a staunch Chomsky-ite...as far too many Cantabridgians are, and also, he was NOT a Truther...but was into peace and justice. I did find this fellow being there interesting, not that he knew I was going to be there because nobody knew this, but that his negative energy towards the 9/11TM was present.
One of the breakout sessions with Zarembka-Zwicker as presenters created an overflowing room with almost all Truthers...and NO peace activists...and interesting set of events since Peter's voice was indeed so strong for peace. I felt that this was just another form of "shunning" of the 9/11TM at the hand of the Peace? Movements.
As the day came to an end, unfortunately, a Green Party Truther from Maine got a chance to take the MIC in front of a diminished crowd...and he ended his contributions by calling for each state to secede from the union. This guy was simply dim and I feel it merely a problematic event for the 9/11 TM.
At the end of the entire day there was to be a "dining event" at a local joint and it was attended primarily by Truthers and I suspect that the "real peace movement insiders" silently shuffled us out of the way while assembling elsewhere...but I do not know this.
Anyway, think what you might about my words, by my experiences have shown me that this was a set-up...and the targets were Peter Dale Scott, Barrie Zwicker as counterpoints to Chomsky, and of course, the 9/11TM in general.
However, the peace movements did nothing more than roll out its one trick...assembling for a big??? march somewhere as they "rebuilt" the peace movement. The PM is completely compromised...now by its own hand as they have only one club in their golf bag.
In the meantime, the 9/11 Truth for Peace Movement is growing and it remains vigilant to the same internal divisiveness that the peace movements have been unwilling to see or deal with for four decades...and that's even WITH the Intel agencies admitting their infiltrations. Its STUNNING how ignorant this group is...simply stunning!
So, if the peace movements do indeed "rebuild" most likely it will be at the hand of the 9/11TM...and we need to do this alone.
The best that we can do is perhaps model ourselves after the formula down in San Diego [and now I read about Milwaulkie], and keep the door open to TRUE peace activists who are willing to work in THIS century instead of shuffling their feet thinking of last century while pruning their gray hairs. Keeping the door open in this way will naturally filter out those who might be disruptive anyway. The existing peace movements are simply not worth the effort to attract. We can do it easier by just doing what we do.
The 9/11 Truth for Peace group represented us very, very well and I was and am proud to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with you all...
9/11 TRUTH for World PEACE
Robin Hordon
Kingston, WA
So is the
9/11TM organizing to attend the March 20th, in DC? I did not see any 9/11 groups endorsing the event in the email I received from ANSWER.
San Francisco
The Northern California 9/11 Truth Alliance will participate in the ANSWER demonstration on March 20th in San Francisco, as we do every year.
We always march with them and set up at least one booth to assist in our public education activities and are generally very well received by the rank and file peace activists and march attendees. Only the leadership of the various coalition groups remain near universally hostile to us and 9/11 truth.
The question of whether or not we will officially endorse it will be discussed at our next meeting. ANSWER is quite hostile to 9/11 truth and they want us to donate money before they will even consider letting a 9/11 truth identified speaker on the stage for even 2 minutes.
ANSWER is clearly controlled opposition, imo, and everyone has to determine if the benefits of getting close to them (on their terms, I hasten to add) outweigh the costs.
No matter what, we should all attend peace and anti-war events and continue educating the rank and file about the events of 9/11 and its relevance to creating lasting peace through a process of justice and/or truth and reconciliation.
The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.
Here it is
http://www.911blogger.com/node/22532
Unfortunately, it didn't get front-paged. :-(
I also posted at JREF, asking whether the JREF'ers thought that a WAC effort to setup chapters on campuses would succeed. The combined wisdom of JREF is currently polling at 13 : 1 in favor of such a WAC effort being a complete flop.
I was the one guy voted that it would be a great success, not a complete flop.
http://www.DemocracyABC.org
http://www.therealnews.com
http://www.pdamerica.org
Yes, I helped her
I posted this as a reply to Joe's "Cindy IS with us..." but showed up here... Sorry! I don't know how to move this back there.
================================================
Cindy came to Melbourne four years ago(Gee, time flies!) and at the Public Meeting, the night before the conference, she said that 9/11 was "done by Al Qaida."
So I thought to myself, "Oh no! She doesn't know it!!" Spent hours that night, gathering all kinds of data/facts, and gave it to her following day which changed her speech to, "Osama did it, who did it, I don't know."
Along with help from so many others(I believe there were), she eventually figured it out - I believe she was basically too busy just to protest this illegal war. Anyway, I was really happy to hear her talk about 9/11 truth when interviewed by Alex Jones! ;O)
As for super pathetic Peace activists, that's actually what I told Barrie when I met him in Sydney two years ago though I bet he was aware of them then.
I was a speaker at a few rallies/protests, sang songs in front of a major train station with so many participants listening along with a bunch of police officers, LOL. But as soon as I started pursuing 9/11 Truth, I was not invited. They even stopped sending me mail notice of rallies and protests. INCREDIBLE.
I BET bunch of them have been simply misguided by the tops who taught them, "To endorse this 9/11 Truth movement is like to ignore all the real Arab terrorists." I'm like, Don't you remember those British SAS soldiers with Arab costume and explosives in their vehicle, got arrested by Iraqi police and what did Brits do in order to get them back? What do you think they were doing?
Hope some activists with brain will wake up soon.
I've been waiting for quite a few years now.
*sigh*
=================================
9/11 Truth Australia
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Aus911Truth
September 11th was an Inside Job!
http://www.youtube.com/aftertruth
SOLUTION
http://aus911truth.blogspot.com/2009/11/solution.html
infiltration
Barrie is, of course, correct that infiltration is a serious problem. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I appear isolated in my response. I urge people to confine themselves to criticizing what people do or say rather than make personal attacks. Show minute by minute we each know the difference between evidence and speculation. Otherwise, venomous words from us indicate the same as these words do from our venomous adversaries. It suggests one's evidence and logic is weak.
David Slesinger dslesinger@alum.mit.edu
911courage.org
911courage.blogspot.com
Stop-Martial-Law.com
JenningsMystery.com
YourCowardiceIsBelowYou.com
443-682-8725
Couple of things,
I see nobody mentioned this here so I'll jot it down.
The importance of revealing the 9/11 lie - one of the reasons I see is so that the world will learn the invasion of AFGHANISTAN was also super unfair, illegal and unforgivable a crime as well as the invasion of Iraq.
As long as people believe the official line, many tend to condone that one even when they disagree with Iraq 'War.' But we need everybody to realize that bombing Afghanistan was also a horrible, horrible crime based on lies.
From there, people will hopefully realize that ALL WARS ARE BASED ON LIES OF THOSE IN POWER so that the world won't be fooled ever again. That way, we can achieve a genuine peace on this planet and that's one of the reasons why I do what I've been doing. ;o)
Another thing I want to point out is as many of you already know, that EMOTION blocks people's ability to see through the reality ESPECIALLY when we talk about spooks.
Within either group of peace activists incl anti-nuke/DU and so forth or 9/11 Truth movement, there are lots of spooks unfortunately.
But many tend to deny that fact because it is SO UNCOMFORTABLE to just imagine that there is one/are some among us which means "I WAS DECEIVED" which is really hard for many to admit.
People do not want to think that they were "THAT DUMB to be swindled," therefore they'd rather ignore the possibility of having plants among themselves and say things like, "Oh YOU are the one who's trying to divide us" or "How could you say so&so is a spook when he/she has been doing SO MUCH for the entire movement!?" when the reality is, they cannot do their job unless they gain our trust 100%.
Anyway, it's just like many people ignore 9/11 Truth in general.
Same thing.
The real culprits KNOW THIS VERY WELL and have been USING it=our emotions VERY EFFECTIVELY.
I believe that's one of the biggest reasons why spooks and their bosses have been SO successful over decades if not centuries. Therefore, we need to keep ourselves calm and observe things well instead of flat denying the possibility and letting emotion cloud our judging ability.
And again, I wish from the bottom of my heart that those spooks will change their mind, realize their horrible mistakes and join us well and truly in the near future.
=================================
9/11 Truth Australia
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Aus911Truth
September 11th was an Inside Job!
http://www.youtube.com/aftertruth
SOLUTION
http://aus911truth.blogspot.com/2009/11/solution.html
Anti-war vs. 9/11 Truth
The anti-war movement launches an unprovoked attack on the 9/11 Truth, with slander as their chief weapon. The question is how to respond, and I would say with love maybe. Or we could launch a counter attack and escalate the conflict.
We advocate Truth, Justice and Peace, for without Truth there will be no
Justice, and without Justice there will be no Peace.
These aforementioned platitudes are imho axiomatic and should not even be need
to be said, but there are those who defy the truth, for the sake of nefarious
agendas, that Truth only interferes with, and so they lie, and they attack
without grounds, and many of us, likely most of us, know when we are being lied
to, and slandered.
I guess it comes down to this: are these people deliberately lying, or are they
just stupid, or both? Lead me, follow me, or get out of the way, and if you cant
do anyone of the three, then you are the enemy. These people would serve our
cause better if they would join the other side. Please, join the other side! Get
the hell out of the way!
Love or Walk?
Alfons,
Jesus said love your neighbor, and He also said if your neighbor refuses to listen, then just walk away.
Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief DNotice.org
Washington, DC
I could be wrong...
I could be wrong, but I think Jesus said "then just walk away, or get your 9-11 Truth friends and carry massive blue banners proclaiming 9-11 Truth in the Anti-war march on March 20th."
PEACE,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org
_____________________________________________
I work for the 9-11 First Responders, the 9-11 victims, and all those who are being slaughtered and tortured because of 9-11.
Many of the anti-war movement people I have met
are either uniformed or marginally uniformed about 911. I mostly put my status as a 911 truther on the table immediately when interacting. Many libertarians I have encountered are only marginally informed about 911. We need to continue to educate everyone we can. I personally feel that 911 truth is the best path to lasting and pervasive peace. The anti-war effort will never be successful without new enlightened members who understand the significance of deep events like 911. The vietnam war only ended when the military knew that it had milked it for all it was worth and the public had had enough at that point. The public opinion and the 100's of thousands of protesters were put on hold until enough weapons had been sold. The almost free press with the pentagon papers helped to enlighten enough people to the situation but did not wake people up to the bigger truth. If we had been truly awake the the nonsense of the WMD's hoax could not have been employed and perhaps we might have even questioned 911 sooner. The best evidence we have is WTC 7, this is the smoking gun which any reasonalble person who encounters it must start questioning not only what happened but why they didn't even know about it to begin with. The anti-war movement today is unfocused, unorganized, uniformed, and without 911 truth will be as unsuccessful as it always has been. I am not interested in immigration reform I am interested frankly in AMERICA FIRST and will support leaders who can put Americans first. Why ? Because Americans have built the greatest country with the greatest freedom the history of the world has known. We had good principles including reasonable profits and collective bargaining that were hard fought solutions we could be proud of. If the rest of the world wanted to be like the USA good for them copy us. Instead we lost sight of our ideals and let our leaders sell us out!