We Are Change has Amy Goodman on the run

A compilation of Amy Goodman's responses to questions concerning Building 7, Architects & Engineers, and the 911 cover up including a new confrontation at DePaul University by We Are Change Chicago



Thank you WAC Chicago, and WAC everywhere for exposing her hypocrisy. She needs to start walking the walk.

Agreed, let's make this video to viral

and let Ms. Goodman choke on her own words or start giving 9/11 truth the coverage it deserves.

How many times has she had Jeremy Scahill on and she can't have Richard Gage on even once?

I am so sick of gatekeepers, especially the so called "progressives" in the allegedly "alternative" news media.

Thank you for this most excellent video!

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

Thanks Leftwright..........it is finally coming out.............

just how fraudulent the alternative media is.
It is impossible that none of the main alternative sites, like DemocracyNow with Amy Goodman, simply do not understand or notice the inconsistencies and contradictions and implausibilities of the official story of 9/11.
They have purposely avoided the issue of 9/11 truth, and their censorship has helped bring about the wars, occupations and shredding of the Constitution that is all a result of the War on Terror, based on 9/11. They are directly responsible for all of it, including the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

You and I worked hard to embarrass Alternet.com to provide some coverage of 9/11 truth, until we got banned from the site. I'm so glad you are still at it, exposing the alternative media and their censorship of the most important information ever.

Here are the criminal media outlets:

DemocracyNow (Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzales)
Alternet (Joshua Holland)
antiwar.com (Justin Raimondo)
Common Dreams
Nation mag
Z mag

Not only have these sites censored the truth of 9/11, they have had articles insulting those in the movement.
It is time to fight back against them.

That was well done!

Walk the walk or run.

She's afraid

it's obvious. Some of my friends who have read Chomsky and watch democracy now won't listen and look at me like I must be paranoid because these gatekeepers have them hypnotized. They know our govt. lies all the time but 911 is still off the table because of people like her who indirectly protect the traitors. Nice work Chicago! We need to take the gloves off! It's not all about east timor, It's about the twin towers and WTC7 and so much more, stop distracting people to distant lands and expose the criminals and the crimes in our own back yard.

Amy Goodman has been

Amy Goodman has been intimidated or perhaps she fears for her life. They did kill 3000 in cold blood. These sorts of aggressive confrontations do nothing but reflect poorly on the 9/11 Truth movement.

The assumption is that she is preventing the truth or supporting the conventional conspiracy theory and that's not true. She's called from a new investigation, but she doesn't want to sink her "career" or lose her life over it I suspect.

Jesse Ventura is picking this up and he's not afraid. Look to him to do the heavy lifting here.

Chomsky finds the 9/11 truth alternative so complex... and he could be wrong... that it would be impossible to pull it off AND keep everyone quiet. He's a blow back guy thinking 9/11 was a response by AQ to our imperial actions in the ME. He's not alone in this and a reaction to our imperialism makes sense.

But 9/11 was likely a false flag and it was an ACT of imperialism. Take that Amy Goodman and Noam Chomsky.

Amy Goodman ...

is an exemplar of passive compliance in the face of endemic corruption... she has lost all credibility as an advocate for truth and democracy.

While she may pay lip service to calls for a new investigation when confronted on the issue, she does nothing at all to further the pursuit of truth and justice in relation to the crime of 9/11.

Faux dissidents and left gatekeepers like Amy Goodman are intellectually mired by their need to believe in a system that has served them well.

The topic of Amy Goodman, Noam Chomsky and

9/11 has been discussed here many times.

I, personally, believe that Amy Goodman has been compromised in any number fo ways.

While all we can do is guess at what's going on with them both, a commenter in a previous discussion said something I had never thought about before.

It was a supposition that neither would seriously advocate for 9/11 truth because doing so would ultimately lead back to Israel.

That's still interesting to me.


I know it's a bit late but I just today stumbled on this topic while researching truthout.org. I am so disgusted with the leftgatekeepers like Amy Goodman and Chomsky, that I could hurl. Any serious investigation of 9/11 does indeed lead right straight to Tel Aviv. Mossad was a key player in the planning and execution of the events of 9/11....period.

Agreed and then some. What's with you guys and this harassment?

I agree with Sandero who says, "These sorts of aggressive confrontations do nothing but reflect poorly on the 9/11 Truth movement."

This is stating it mildly.

And you guys who are jumping on the bandwagon, talking like you're gonna corner Amy Goodman, got her on the run, (gonna run her outta town?) dis-credit her, etc. might want to pay attention and learn a thing or two.

You wanna bring about positive change in society?

Then you better figure out the difference between an enemy and a potential ally -someone with whom you may have a serious disagreement, but with whom you also have many common interests.

Otherwise, you're going to alienate yourself from a dozen communities of people for every one you connect with, and WE are going to get nowhere.

Second, you need to know something about the person your criticizing, or you're going to... well, be the recipient of un-intended consequences. When you criticize someone... to be fair, you need to keep in mind whatever good they're also doing, and the COMMUNITY of people she's connected to.

Amy Goodman has been championing a thousand and one causes of oppressed peoples for decades. She has earned a dedicated following of intelligent people who are anti-war, anti-racist, anti-sexist, and so on. Though we may have dis-agreements here and there, these people are natural allies of truth.

Personally, I'm very disappointed with Amy Goodman, Chomsky, etc. I think they've made themselves largely irrelevant, though they continue to cover important stories here and there. But the important thing is that, when you attack people like goodman, especially with a bullhorn in an auditorium, then you're just hardening her followers against you (and US!!).

Imagine for a moment that you've been struggling for three decades against the forces of the military-industrial-complex, the architects of genocide, mass poverty, brutality. You've seen the suffering that no human should have to see; and you dedicate yourself to doing something about it. Then a horrible event comes along, (9-11) and you take a certain approach to it (that we know is wrong) but that seems reasonable to you... given everything you seen. Then you start getting attacked for it. What are you going to do?
You're going to think of those attacking you as either thoughtless delinquents or paid agents of disruption.

So please, try to be respectful. Try to understand why people honestly dedicated to social justice sometimes turn away from troublesome problems, (like 9-11) and then why they resist people who are rude.

Try to understand what it's like for leaders in the peace movement and 'the left.' They've always been marginalized in the press, they've always struggled to try and sound "reasonable" to a brainwashed public.
Their number one concern is CREDIBILITY. They're so anal about it they're hardly even aware; but it's because they care.... and they bear a responsibility to all those who listen to them.
You have to step in their shoes for a moment before you criticize.

They took the easy road around 9/11 ("blowback") because it seemed an easy argument.
It sucks; but I say forget about Goodman and Chomsky, etc. Speak to the people in the peace movement directly. Be friendly, informative. When they change, (as they are now beginning to, thanks to the work of some 9-11 groups) then they'll compel Goodman etc. to take a more-thoughtful look.

I can't count the number of people on 'the left' I've heard talking about how rude the truthers can be. Cindy Sheehan said that very thing at the recent "Treason in America" conference.

If people want to see a wedge being continually driven between the peace movement (all things associated with 'the left') and 9-11 truth, then I can think of no better way than attacking Amy Goodman et al in this manner.

If we want real change... if we want to see 'we, the people' coming together in a real BIG movement for change, then I suggest we try to be constructive and fair in our criticism, that we become fully informed about the person before we criticize, and we think of building alliances with people rather than excluding people because we think we see the only truth that matters.


Excellent Post, Andreyo

Amy Goodman does so much good, she is not perfect, as no one on this blog is perfect. These confrontational QA 's mainly preach to the choir, don't gain new citizens to the 9/11 truth movement.

Yes, excellent post

We should not interpret criticism of the kinds of activism shown in the video as resulting from somehow being less aware of, or frustrated by, gatekeeping 'alternative' media. I am very much conscious--as I think most all of us on this site are--of just how helpful such 'opposition' has been to the warmakers and rights-suppressors by virtue of their shutting out critques of the war-and-tyranny-enabling 9/11 official story; and also very conscious of just how frustrating it is trying to bring them around on this subject, as is trying to educate their audiences so that they will begin to think more independently of these political icons.

I just don't see how any of this is well served by the kinds of tactics shown in the video. Is this supposed to make Amy Goodman start to give more coverage to 9/11 truth? Is it supposed to make other members of the audience more knowledgeable about the facts of 9/11, and help them not to be overly dependent on programs like 'Democracy Now' in obtaining news? If such are the goals, I don't see how tactics like these can possibly be the way to advance them.

What would it be like if, instead, a truth activist stood up and said something like: 'Amy, you've said we need a real investigation of 9/11. As you agree that we really haven't gotten the truth yet [a fair inference from what she has said], don't you think it's important that your audience know that the FBI has admitted it has no solid evidence linking Bin Laden to 9/11?' Or, '...that they be informed about the findings of the Niels Harrit paper [briefly describe] Or, '...would you consider having critics of the government's account, such as Richard Gage or Kevin Ryan, on your show?'

I'm not naive about Goodman. I think she's ever-conscious of her funding sources and the requirements of maintaining them. BUT, it's not as if she's trashed us the way many 'alternative' outlets have, and it's not as if she's never said that we need a real investigation. Most important, even if we are unable to get her to change her (non-) coverage of 9/11 truth, we need to make the most of opportunities to get critical 9/11 facts across to as many members of her audience as will listen. Do tactics like these help to do this? Ask yourself, if you are at a 9/11 truth-related event and someone stands up and starts shouting about: "How come you never talk about [fill in the blank?]' How receptive are we, in the 9/11 truth movement, to such tactics? Should we expect others to be any more receptive?

Yes, however

your suggestion that
"a truth activist stood up and said something like: 'Amy, you've said we need a real investigation of 9/11. As you agree that we really haven't gotten the truth yet [a fair inference from what she has said], don't you think it's important that your audience know that the FBI has admitted it has no solid evidence linking Bin Laden to 9/11?' Or, '...that they be informed about the findings of the Niels Harrit paper [briefly describe] Or, '...would you consider having critics of the government's account, such as Richard Gage or Kevin Ryan, on your show?'

is a good one. However, not all of us can remain unemotional when we think of the extensive and never ending bloodshed of 911 and the failure of people like Goodman to promote the real truth as it emerges. I am for what ever tactics result in her waking up in the middle of the night to realize she is failing the never ending victims of 911 and her own good conscience.

Amy Goodman defines controlled opposition.

Keep pressing WAC and not just her but all the left gatekeepers.


everybody in gov and in the media has been given the information many times over.... they don't want it... now it's treason.

their machine is run on the commerce we engage in.... it's time to stop paying for our own enslavement and buy local patriot manufacturing and local food...

RT has been more than professional and accommodating to the information....if the cable companies are watching the digital boxes, then watch RT when you can and leave it on when you're not watching .... make RT the #1 news network... then all the big corporations will stop spending their advertising dollars on the lamestream and start spending it on RT.... it's all about the viewer #'s

The newspapers are almost dead.....want to see the lamestream media completely shrivel up? don't support them... it's that simple.

..we've got enough dirt on everyone to expose them with their own words.. they've all been given the info..

if you believe Amy when she says she hasn't head about A&E's 1000+ membership, then I have a bridge in Fla for you.... that info was impossible to miss considering this movement is the biggest thing going on the internet and that news was on all the sites and all the blogs... BULLSHIT AMY.... BULLSHIT!!!

Yes, do not support any alternative media sites........

that have not conscientiously presented 9/11 truth evidence of the coverup and lies of the official story.
Especially don't support financially sites that have insulted 9/11 truth, like Alternet and Counterpunch and antiwar.com and Truthout and CommonDreams. They are the enemy, even though I have to admit I get a lot of good views on other issues from them.

I wish there was a very well visited progressive site that would present 9/11 truth. All of the bigger sites are part of the criminal conspiracy to censor 9/11 truth.

The big thing to remember is this: there is absolutely no way that the people involved in running these media outlets just don't understand 9/11 truth. That is impossible. They were never so naive about WMD or many other issues that the msm covers up. They dug out the truth. Here, with 9/11 truth, they have the truth handed to them, over and over again.
They PURPOSELY, immorally, criminally avoid the issue.................pure treasonous censorship.

They have, so far, killed 9/11 truth from being understood by Americans. They have done it for dishonest reasons. There is no reason that we need to be polite, hopeful, and patient with these people. They are not friends of 9/11 truth. Being nice to them has not worked in 9 years. There is no reason to believe they will change their tune.

By the way, instead of supporting DemocracyNow as I once did, when they have their drives with the number at the bottom, I call often to express my displeasure with their censorship of 9/11 truth. I think it would help if many others would do the same.

I stopped supporting so called alternative sites

quite some time ago, precisely because of their "mainstream" attitude on the issue of 9/11 ...

I think perhaps it's time I started letting them know, on a regular basis.

If enough people express their concerns, it just might open a few minds ...


"I wish there was a very well visited progressive site that would present 9/11 truth."

Information Clearing House and Dissident Voice are two examples. They don't have the same degree of exposure as the sites you listed, but they have a respectably sized readership.

Why do they censor the truth of 9/11???

This has been the great enigma for me. They cover just about anything else that is verboten in the msm...............like the truth about Israel, and the WMD lies. Why this? Why be so fraudulent about this?

This is my take on it:

All of these alternative media sites, like Alternet and DemocracyNow and Counterpunch, etc, take money from foundations. Follow the tangled, weblike support for these foundations and usually you will find the same corporate and financial elite international organizations and Christian and Zionist lobbies.

The alternative media has effectively killed 9/11 truth. It was a given that msm wasn't going to follow and investigate the true story and the evidence of lying. It was up to the alternative media to do it. Had they done it, they would have reached a LOT of Americans, enough to build a consensus of enough people that the msm would have been embarrassed into presenting the truth.
But they didn't do it.
The elites in control knew that if they killed the truth in the alternative media, that 9/11 truth would remain a fringe issue. They were right. They won.
They won the first 9 years of battles.
But the war is not over.
We need to embarrass the alternative media, pressure the media outlets, to present the truth, and it is RIGHT to be aggressive. Pleading and hoping doesn't cut it. They have their orders from the big dogs, and maybe threats, maybe the removal of support money, but the leaders of alternative media are not going to bite the hand that feeds them, unless they are truly pressured, relentlessly, by 9/11 truth.

The confrontation they're really avoiding

If I had to guess, I think that it is known intuitively how much of a political shake-up this country will be in for if the majority of the population ever accepts that 9/11 was an inside job, false-flag event. When the majority of the people are aware not only in a repressed, unconscious way, but consciously acknowledge both to themselves and one another the sheer depravity and treasonousness of the U.S. oligarchy that is revealed through an examination of all the facts relating to 9/11, then the foundations of that structure of oligarchic control in this country will begin to shake as never before.

And the prospect of such topsy-turvy upheavels confronts those who have set themselves up as critics and opponents of this power structure with some real dilemmas. It forces them to consider: 'How much change do I really want after all? Isn't it going pretty well, being able to "play radical" within the status quo, without actually ever having to directly experience what REAL political change would consist of? And the longer we can postpone that day of reckoning, the longer we can also pospone the risk of being exposed as hypocrites, posing as opponenets of the status quo while in fact finding it to be quite accomodating.'

They can thereby also postpone the day of having to fess up that they were fooled about 9/11 just like most of the rest of us, and therefore aren't the beacons of political astuteness that they like to present themselves as.

What you say has merit, but..............

consider this: There are many alternative media outlets that have completely censored, or even mocked, 9/11 Truth. It is nearly nine years, and not much has changed.
While it may be that some journalists fear the upheaval that could come about if the truth of 9/11 was exposed, you really can't tell me that ALL of these journalists, several or many in each alternative media outlet, all feel the need to maintain silence on such a huge issue because of the consequences.
Journalists aren't like that. Most go for the big story, regardless of where it takes us...........and that is a good thing.

Journalists are the big wrench in the works of truth in this issue. We would not be a fringe element if journalists, just a few here and there, were doing what they are usually doing and supposed to do. They are muffled, somehow. We need to find out why. Don't any of us know any journalists well enough to find out why?

Ever wonder why there are so many sites of different kinds of professionals for 9/11 truth, but there are no site called "Journalists for 9/11 Truth"?

There is a group of media for truth

There is a group, http://mediafor911truth.org/, but the membership does not appear to be large.

The wrong way...

I stand opposed to confrontational tactics to anyone at this stage of the game...

This kind of activity will prevent Gage and Griffin and Scott and others from ever geting on their shows...

Cass Sunstein has made it clear that OBOMBYA should infiltrate the 9/11 Truth Movement...

That Russia Today is the major outlet of media in support of 9/11 Truth should be a significant warning to everyone involved...

We are being set up...again...and the confrontational We Are Changes came into the 9/11TM in 2005-6 right when the 9/11TM was really getting going...and they did great damage then, along with the Ron Paul cdillusionals] and this is all happening again.

If this behavior continues, it will end the 9/11TM...which in my view, is exactly what the WACs and now Sunstein might be jointly after.

Sorry about that...but I've been there in the 60s...and done that.

Alex Jones is NOT the answer...scholarly and well researched behavior and information are.

CLEARLY the professional approaches that we have used since WACs have calmed down were working BIG TIME...

And then this outburst.

If this behaivior continues, if wiser heads do not prevail and if we derail all the wonderful professionals' abilities to be heard only on RT and a diminishing number of other outlets, you are watching the end of 9/11 Truth.

We need to be our own media and our own educators...we do not need to shoot ourselves in the foot.

This conduct and thread are showing foolish behaviors and foolish support.

9/11 Truth for World Peace and Justice

Robin Hordon
Kingston, WA

You just don't get it...............

NINE (!) years have gone by and the alternative media hadn't made the slightest effort to present any 9/11 truth evidence. Do you really think they are going to change without a big, raucous shove? Frankly, at this point, none of these outlets are even worth considering. They are so tainted with censorship of the biggest story in American history that they can never regain any respectability as honorable journalistic outlets.

I am astounded that someone still thinks people like Amy or Justin Raimondo or Alexander Cockburn (Counterpunch) or Joshua Holland (Alternet) could ever begin to present the TRUTH after presenting articles that were only insulting and humiliating to the 9/11 movement.

There are reasons why these sites do not present the TRUTH...............we can speculate, but we do not know what they are. But after years of being nice and trying to convince, it is clear they have their agenda, and it is lies and obfuscation.

I think they need to be humiliated for being exactly what they were supposed to be the solution for.............censorship and agenda driven journalism.

I don't know if pfgetty is right...but I feel this way also!

This is how many of us feel and we have the reasons stated!

I have crawled on my knees for these imbeciles, and I won't do it any more! If I have a chance to carefully and intelligently shame them, I will!

Regards John

Me too.

That is what is normal procedure for all social movements fighting against the prevailing wind..............public embarrassment.
That IS what protest is. Getting the word out that isn't normally heard, and showing the world we are being treated improperly.
And that is what shaming the media is. Nothing wrong with that, morally, ethically, or any other way.

No. You don't get it.

And you don't seem to be able to acknowledge any viewpoint outside of your own.

Robin, the writer to which you reply, speaks of the damage done to the dialogue between 'the left'
and 9-11 truth by this aggressive approach; and all you can say is that we've been nice and patient
with them for nine years.

You call them enemies. You speak of humiliating them. And all you're going to do is harden them
and their followers against US.

The writer below says, "you" (Robin, Andreyo, etc.) can have your (polite) approach, and I'll have my (aggressive) one. The problem with this of course is that YOUR approach ruins/defines everybody else's.

So is there any compromise or common ground here?

Yeah. Stop using your energy attacking Amy Goodman and start talking constructively with her followers. If you're not pushy but kind, informative and a good listener, then you will have an effect and Amy Goodman will eventually be compelled her own followers to cover the story.

That's the way to do it: effectively, without confrontation.

There are so many ways in which this aggressive, leader-focused approach suggests a young mind, unable to grasp the complexities of building a broad social movement.

So with all due respect to you guys who want to direct all this anger at this lady who, in spite of her failing in this one (admittedly very important area) is doing a lot of important work, let me say this: please think about this some more, or you may find (one day) that you've simply managed to shoot yourselves (and US) in the foot.

Hi Robin,

You are right in a way, but don't you think showing Goodman to be a false radical is useful...does it not encourage us to be the media as you say?

We need all ways and methods in this fight as long as they are peaceful. I am happy that Goodman is worried about public meetings these days, we live in the real world and so should one who professors to be for peace!

Making these jokes of journalists squirm is part of the awakening to the truth of the human condition. Once we see how useless they are we realize it can only be us that can save this planet?

I see it as all part of the process?

Kind regards John

John, she KNOWS...and

...just surviving to tell of other issues around teh world. If you read her book Exception to The Rulers it comes clear that she is aware of acts such as 9/11 being pulled off by some larger powers.

And NO...making these types of journalists "squirm" is simply not the way ahead...and its simply not worth my or your, or anybody's time spent doing so. Even writing all this posts to once again try and bring an end to confrontational tactics is a big waste of my time...but for the movement to survive, I keep reminding Truthers of this failed tactic from the past.

There are many posts that show the "information based"...and "be our own media"...and "be our own educators" makes great sense to them and they have expressed clear thinking that is not anger based.

I'm VERY angry...like when the FAA continued to operate an unsafe ATC system when I got fired as a controller in 1981...they booted [rushed] an Air Florida B737 off of National Airport and the engines iced up from the slush...the B737 stalled and bounced off of the 14th Street Bridge over the Potomac...and they didn't care one twit then...and they don'y care one twit now about who they kill or how they kill them. Its only their family cabals and horrendous financial controls that seem to keep the HI PERPS satisfied...so I'm VERY angry...but I do not take it out except in positive and peaceful means whenever I can.

Going ballistic and confrontational will end the movement.

It won't end truth seeking or most of us being Truthers for our lives...but the movement, which requires the public to be involved will dissolve.

We will get our chance to expose the media [s] down the road...unless we snuff ourselves out first.

9/11 Truth For World Peace and Justice

Robin Hordon
Kingston, WA


I fully agree. She has stated she supports a new investigation, and yet people keep shoving scientific reports in her face.
The guy yelling at the end was acting like a total asshole, and it only makes the rest of us look like total assholes. I rated this video with 1 star, because it is a very poor avenue of research and only makes us all look like confrontational neurotics.

It is not Amy's role to say to small groups.............

that we need a new investigation.
When she says that, that is absolutely nothing. Nobody hears it that needs to hear it, and she knows that.
Her job, as a journalist, is to provide important information to her listeners about what she knows going on in the world...........about facts..........about evidence.
And as a journalist in the ALTERNATIVE media, it is especially important to bring out information that the msm is keeping from us.

She fails in ALL of these things. We don't care that she tells somebody standing next to her that we need a new investigation.
If she were honest and doing her job, she would say that on her show, and back it up with copious interviews and the piles of evidence that wonderful and dedicated and honest researchers have done. It is all right there, sitting there for her to pick up and report.
She will not.
She refuses to.
She criminally censors this information.
And because of her censorship, along with almost all other alternative media journalists, probably a million people, innocent people, have died or been horribly maimed. Many more made homeless and jobless and ruined for life because of loss of loved ones.

Think this through.

supports a new investigation?

She should be telling her audience every single day that she supports a new investigation, and she should get down to the nitty gritty as to why she supports a new investigation. Amy Goodman is an extremely damaging part of the treasonous 9-11 cover up.

I do agree that getting hostile with a bull horn is not the best approach, but I don't think it will hurt the 9-11 Truth movement over all. We come in all shapes sizes and colors, and that makes us powerful.

The 9-11 Truth movement is one grand experiment. I would love to see how others are doing their outreach. Get that video camera and document your tactics so that the rest of us may learn. Sharing your experiences via video is a critical part of the 9-11 Truth movement, and I want to personally thank all those who video tape themselves and share.

Thank you WeAreChange Chicago.

With you in the struggle,

Good attitude. Thanks for that.

It all is a diverse movement.
If some feel they should be extremely polite, patient, and never raise eyebrows, then go for it.
Others feel differently.
I do.
There is room for us all.

the end of the truth movement?

Robin, this is a provocative statement.
How do you see it all ending if WAC and others continue?
Layout the scenario so that we can anticipate, plan and prepare. I am a believer in all strategies...shotgun approach.
I appreciate concerns about strategy, but the various organizations are not going to change their tactics.
so, lets dialog about how can think 3-4 steps in advance.

A Movement needs PEOPLE

Andreyo has explained my conceptual position very well so I will not go into that except to make the point that cointelpro knows how to derail movements...and its agents and actions are usually very undetectable sometimes.

If you focus upon the word MOVEMENT, which I do...then one must understand that movements have to include PEOPLE in order to sustain...and hopefully grow. The "off-putting" behaviors shown against Goodman [and formerly by confrontational WACers like Luke Rudkowsy] will do as these types of NEGATIVE AND NEWS BITE BEHAVIORS have historically always done...

...they will drive normal citizens away from the movement SIMPLY because of the behavior and not because of the reasons behind the movement itself...

This is rule #1 for cointelpro activities...help create bad behaviors and get it onto corporate media so that average citizens turn against the bad behavior...and as a byproduct, against the issue at hand also.

Rule #2 is to steer the peace movements into decades long naps and into ONLY using outdated tactics that worked ONCE fourty years ago. IE:

Break out the Peace "T" every few years, walk a few miles with a diminishing number of people who are also living on their 60s laurels, and your peace work is done...so, you can go back to your NAP feeling contented...

Without people one does not have a movement...we should be more welcoming to the average citizen.

I will always be a Truther, because I have been one well before 9/11...since I read The Pentagon Papers when I was 19 or so.

Truthers and truth seeking about 9/11 will never go away...

...But the 9/11 Truth "Movement" may indeed fizzle away if its mishandled...

...as cointelpro KNOWS how to assist...

...and I hear the same old cointelpro lines on this thread...deja-vu for me...

We need to do better at public relations...and I do "get it"...

9/11 Truth for World Peace and Justice

love, peace and progress...

Robin Hordon
Kingston, WA

approaching the left

There is no one more upset by the suppression of the hard questions about 911 by left media than I am. While I agree the term left-gatekeeper, while not vulgar and accurate, is inferior to left adversary, since the term left adversary encourages respectful exchanges. DRG speaks against the term left gatekeeper.

Some of the approaches posted on this video were impressively polite. Some of them were overly hostile. Most statements made with a hostile tone can be said with a respectful tone.

The proposal I make now I have made for over a year and has got no traction with truth activists. All leftists are antiracist. Success by our movement would necessarily undercut racist sentiment toward Arab and Muslim people, in turn undercutting an important element in the wars those leftists oppose. It must be noted that such an assertion in no way proves false flag. It would only mean those who excuse their refusal to examine the evidence with the assertion the 911 truth is a distraction would have to engage us on the evidence.

The rationale that individuals in the corporate media use to suppress us necessarily is dependent on the reality that our natural allies, the peace movement, do not support us.

I announced last year at the WDT conference in NY in September that I intend to do civil disobedience against the left on their suppression. I've decided that first I will follow my interview with Howard Zinn (911truth.org 3/9/09) with video interviews with other major figures. Then I will seek respectful video interviews with these figures, moving to civil disobedience only after they refuse, if they refuse. It will proceed along the lines of my NVCD at Valley Forge, ie minimal disruption, maximum sacrifice on my part. I don't expect ANY truth activist to join me in jail, but I'm not against someone of sufficient consciousness from doing so. A humble personality like David Ray Griffin or Steven Jones would help. Being willing to die for the cause is worth considering. Logistical support is welcome from all truth activists, especially researchers, since that is my weak point. My cell is 410-499-5403 call 24/7.

Thank you David.

Thank you.

Wow! Powerful!

We Are Change producing great videos. Thank you for this. Keep it up. More videos please, let's blanket Youtube with them, since the MSM won't touch this.

What about the other gatekeepers?

Other gatekeepers have been mentioned here. Let's get some video of these individuals being confronted. Do any of them speak publicly? I appreciate the work of Amy Goodman and DN and agree that she could be doing much more, but there are others with equal culpability. let the focus drift onto some of them.

Here are a few of the other gatekeepers:

Alternet.com (Joshua Holland is the worst there) (several articles mocking 9/11 truth)
Counterpunch (Alexander Cockburn) (articles mocking 9/11 truth)
antiwar.com (Justin Raimondo................actually a libertarian gatekeeper) (articles mocking 9/11 truth)
CommonDreams (articles mocking 9/11 truth)
Nation mag
Z mag

Good work but we must be polite if we are to win!

Be nice to be nasty:)

Goodman has put up the walls because she thinks we are going to go away, she is wrong.

She really has no choice now, or she will cease to matter.

Kind regards John

But do not be nasty.Cindy Sheehan talks about thisin video below

Herblay FRANCE

bonjour ,
I think that I have seen nearly all the 911 video on Amy Goodman and the one above is the most important yet. But I cannot help thinking about the harrising jackasses that Cindy Sheehan talks about in the video taken at the Treason in America Conference. Have we something to learn here ? If we change methods perhaps Amy will explain soon why see took so long to join the 911 truth movement.

Yours John



No reason to be nasty, but.................

These people need to be put on the spot, and embarrassed publicly.
That is a normal kind of method for a movement pushing against the status quo.
It is exactly what Cindy does all the time.

Remember, nobody here is advocating any violence, and I do not really think it needs to go to actual civil disobedience, which is sometimes appropriate.
All we are talking about is ensuring that these journalists cannot hide from their responsibilities and need to be taken to task in front of the world when they do.

This is sn AMAZING compilation.

It's right on the money and SO professionally done.

How about making a commercial out of THIS video.

A little too long, I know, but maybe there are other ways to use it.

GREAT piece, WAC Chicago!!!

Fox News............it is interesting to consider............

.............that Fox has actually presented more 9/11 Truth information than DemocracyNow has.

Think about this for a moment.

The main stream and alternative medias are being guided away from the truth of 911 at best. Many citizens trying to bring the facts to light are marginalized at best. Some media is involved in misinformation at best. Govt. agencies and commissions are involved in cover-ups as the facts emerge. When the powers that be are restricting the truth and destroying the evidence follow the LOGIC and the hypothesis is the trail of evidence leads back to them and 911 WAS AN INSIDE JOB. It has to have been. When people like GOODMAN and CHOMSKY who make their reputations on bringing light to dark places refuse to honestly look at the facts surrounding 911 they are TRAITORS. Harsh words? Think about the CARNAGE directly relating to 911. Think about the loss of FREEDOM and LIBERTY directly relating to 911. Think about the opprotunity cost to humanity directly relating to 911. If the victims in this country and around the world could have a vote what do you think? So when someone who is connected on a human level to the misery and crimes to humanity involved with this movement feels the appropriate outrage can you blame them for using harsh words? When you have asked nicely time and time again? When individuals have put themselves in a position to help protect or inform us all and then refuse to do their part do they deserve a pass? I vote NO, NO, and NO again! Sorry but the time for nice and polite is over for people like Amy who have had more than enough chances to be honest. Yes I understand that people are afraid , this is a matter of LIFE and DEATH there can be no doubt. MANY have died, without justice many more will die. Some have said that the truth involving 911 could mobilize the masses into an avalanche of disruption and change. I pray it will. Perhaps it's our only chance for a long, long, time at best.


You are especially right when you say that the coverup and restricting the truth over all parts of society truly point to the conclusion that we are on the right track, that it was an inside job.

And the horror that has been, and goes on, is on the shoulders of those who participate in that coverup. The censoring alternative media is a huge, very important part of that coverup, just as much as the highest officials that we lambast regularly.

A can of whoop ass...

As I mentioned to LW in a previous comment, the time is soon for TM to make critical advances. I do believe he and his team are charting a definitive plan of sustainable, well thought engagement. The plan will need financial backing.

Im in for $500 minimum. When the time comes, I sincerely hope ya'll can put some cake in the kitty.

The last guy in the video on the bullhorn, I like him.

It's on!!!

Can you explain a little better?

What is the organization?
What is their plan?
What do they use the money for?

911 Strategy...

Dear pfgetty-

All good questions and I dont yet have definitive answers. LW has just begun the strategic thinking process to advance 911 TM.

1. The organization is TBD. Perhaps several groups would be involved?
2. The plan is in its infancy and being carefully developed. Its best to learn from what and what does not work. The plan will need to be sustainable and effective.
3. Im not exactly sure the allocation of funds. However, as we step outside of the great discussions amongst ourselves we realize the unavoidable costs of engagement ie TV ads, logostics, legal fees, research, etc.

At this point its probably best the 911 TM experts inform the 911 strategic process.

I will offer that Judge Alvin Hellerstein in NY has inidicated the 911 workers and first repsonders now ailing from the WTC toxic powder are to be offered more money, more clear options and less money for the attorneys. It has slowed the process for all good reasons. Maybe he is quietly indicating this is the time for TM to approach him. This is a good time to piggy back on this 911 oppportunity while it's in the MSM. He has offered his committment to 911. He is making himself available in every fire station, school room, etc. Its best to cut grass when the sun is shining.

Bridges, not trenches

Stop marginalizing yourselves !

Stop building trenches , start building bridges !
No matter how valid your point, bullhorning your way through a meeting is NEVER going to work.
Its only effect is to further marginalize the movement. 911 Truth NEEDS people like Amy Goodman, no matter
what you think of her and Democracy Now. The movement needs diplomats as well as activists.
What possible use is it to alienate others by harassing them ? You are doing NOTHING for the movement this way.
Follow this path to complete marginalization, where 6000 truthers claim sole access to truth and everyone else
is either a gatekeeper, an elitist, Bilderberg scum, etc etc. How sad is that ?

The 911 Truth movement is shunned by the left PRECISELY because of these displays.
Another weakness in the whole approach is that even the most soft spoken, well respected members like
DRG, Steven Jones and Richard Gage make a case that holds within it the very real danger of being discussed for
decades to come , like the Grassy Knoll, now coming up to half a century.
There's a disconnect between the 'experts' talking about thermite and young kids with bullhorns.

The goals of justice, accountability and truth are worth fighting for, but this road does not lead to victory, I fear.

I don't think so.

"The 911 Truth movement is shunned by the left PRECISELY because of these displays" Because the left is full of phonies who are afraid of the real truth. There is no real left anymore.

Not all phonies

Yes, phonies exist in left gatherings (which typically consist of people who are also audience members of at least some of the so-called alternative media we've been talking about), but they are not ALL phonies. And in the discussions that they have among themselves, someone might just make a blanket, negative statement about the 9/11 truth movement just like the one you have made about them. Don't we wish to have built some bridges to speak up on our behalf in those situations? Someone who will make the case to the rest of THEM about US that 'they're [i.e. we're] not all obnoxious/abrasive/etc. I've seen some be polite, make their points, offer information I wasn't aware of,' etc. Even getting through to a few such people, to some degree, does something to dissolve the walls that the gatekeepers (and their masters) have tried to build around us.

It's not about being abusive

It's about directly challenging their denial, their lack of committment, thier lack of conscience, their lack of concern, their lack of professional integrity, come on lots of folks with great comments and good manners have tried endlessly for YEARS to "build bridges" and the victim list of 911 just gets longer and longer. Wake up to the reality that these folks are compromised and will never join or help the movement until such time that we really don't need them any longer. Noam Chomsky, Amy Goodman, Howard Zinn you name anyone from the Left and all they do is lie, deny or stall the 911 truth movement. 911 Truth ends war! 911 truth ends corruption! 911truth ends torture! If there's a more important cause or a better issue to back to bring about the most change in helping the world then I'd like to hear about it. In the mean time I stick by my words they're phonies. Listen to the grief of Mrs.
O'connor and then try to really imagine the extent of the grief around the world as a direct result of the 911 LIE. Now the folks we are talking about have put themselves in a position to communicate the truth and have been asked nicely, patiently, with great respect for years and I say now it's time to call them out on it! (without abuse)

Alienating much of the audience

'Wake up to the reality that these folks are compromised and will never join or help the movement until such time that we really don't need them any longer.'

As I thought I made clear in a comment earlier in this thread, I know very well how compromised these supposed progressive stalwarts are, how circumscribed they are in what they will address and how they address it (and nothing has revealed that more than 9/11). Here, you sound pessimistic about prospects of their ever coming around regarding the truth of 9/11, and I'm much the same way. If they ever would (a huge 'if' from what we've observed to this point), I think it would only be as a result of their seeing the ranks of people responding to the 9/11 truth movement and rejecting the official story really swell well above the level where they are now (or, as you put it, to the point where 'we really don't need them any longer'.) But, with or without them, it is the members of their audiences that I'm really concerned about reaching anyway, and that's why I'm not thrilled to see 9/11 truth activists act at such gatherings in ways that seem likely to appeal only to the already-initiated.

(And please note that in my comment above, I wrote 'abrasive' and not 'abusive.' All I really mean by that is, acting in a way that is likely off-putting to many people in the audience.)

OK, I feel we are very close to agreeing on this

my point is that direct confrontation which is not "abrasive" should be a fair tactic at this stage. Yes, I too am concerned about the audience members. I think we need to send a message that people like Goodman might be avoiding something and are not responding to a direct informative inquiry from a
"very concerned" citizen. In addition, people like the reluctant Goodman should be made to feel somewhat uncomforable based upon the "skirting" or superficial look at such an important issue. I have addressed group leaders in the past with somewhat hardball questions asked in a professional but firm manner which results in 1) the leader looking somewhat ill prepared at best and 2) people asking me follow up questions after the presentation etc.


It's very possible that many websites are funded by establishment nonprofits that have given specific instructions that they would withdraw funding if 9-11 "theories" were discussed. That is how the media is controlled.

That is what I have begun to realize over the last..........

................couple of years.
I couldn't understand how some sites, like Alternet, could be so right-on about WMD, the brutality against Palestinians, and the awful toll of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and then be completely silent, and even mocking, of 9/11 truth.
I could understand one journalist not understanding the issues, but not ALL of them.

And then someone told me about their "foundational support". I looked through some websites and found that Alternet is funded by a long list of foundations. I researched a bit about these foundations, and most are entangled in a complicated web of support, but in the end it is the big military industrial complex, the financial power brokers, and Christian and Zionist idealogues, that are at the top of many of these foundations.

I don't have much talent in searching these things out, and I'd love others with more experience to find out more. And it would be wonderful to have some journalist from one of these sites come forward with a story about how they were pressured to avoid the issue.
There are some BIG stories here, hidden now, that should be exposed.

Amy Goodman has received rules to follow, that is clear.

The bigger and more main-stream a media, the more the rules get tight on what may, and what may not be said on air.
Democracy Now does have an important role to play, but of-course they will marginalize themselves from us if they refuse to cover the blatant treasonous lies of the official account of the mass murders criminality and demolitions of 9/11.
In every contact with these people, we should congratulate them for all the good work they are doing, and let them know that we concentrate the little financial support we can afford to media-outlets that also inform about 9/11 Truth.
They will understand, and respect this. In the clip that We_are_Change_Chicago put together, Amy Goodman is doing her best to put across a very important message: she knows all too well that there is a media war going on, and she too has her hands tied behind her back. She is calling out for help, not only for her site, and the good work it does even with their hands tied, but for media freedom in general, and in the interest of continued democracy in America.
We need to join forces with her, not antagonize her, but also push with all our might for a much better coverage of 9/11 Truth.
One good way of doing this right now is chipping in to air Ed Asner’s radio-appeal to visit http://www.ae911truth.org site http://www.ae911truth.org/info/197 !

established non-profits?

It just shows how deep and profound the corruption is when instructions to withold the truth on such a wide ranging issue with almost limitless ramifications is surpressed and denied.

What the heck is her

What the heck is her relentless obsession with problems in the banana republics? The coverage of latin America suggests an odd agenda. In general, I don't think there is anything more repulsive than "alternative media" left-gatekeepers and their lies. At least the corporate media isn't dangling a carrot that everybody doesn't already know to be made out of tin. The Ford Foundation, George Soros or the United Nations are probably just as evil as Boeing and General Electric. Probably worse.

Do Unto Others... My $.02

I really think/feel that if I had been placed in a position of trust, then betrayed that trust, would on some deep level wish to be confronted with my bullshit.

If it takes ramping it up to a high level to get through then so be it.

The magnitude of damage done by omission, distortion, deception is as it is with perpetuating the MYTHS (fairy tales) requires correction.

She and others like her need to see themselves as deceivers and make corrections or at least get out of the way of the GREATER TRUTH.

Getting through to whom?

'If it takes ramping it up to a high level to get through then so be it.'

But that's just it--there is no reason to believe that this method will 'get through,' and much reason to believe that it will alientate others in the audience, making them even LESS receptive to the 9/11 truth message. That's like 'getting through' in reverse.

Get through to the deceivers themselves

Get through to the deceivers themselves

She might be frightened

When I first saw the video of Amy Goodman fleeing the collapse of WTC 7 I became livid that she had failed to report on this, or publicly investigate further. After some reflection I realize that she might be frightened. I know I was frightened when I first started proclaiming my belief that 9/11 was an inside job. And things did go bump in the night shortly thereafter. Amy Goodman was invited to watch what amounts to irrefutable proof that 9/11 was an inside job. Now, the sociopaths responsible for 9/11 murdered ~3000 people in the course of a few hours as a publicly televised media event broadcast live to every part of the planet. The lesson one might take away from this is that these people can get away with mass murder, so taking them on could be dangerous.

Does anybody suspect foul play in the death of Beverly Eckert?

Perhaps I'm being too generous with Amy Goodman. I don't really know.

Campaign, instead of scream; that's real democracy

The way to do it is not to alienate our cause to the millions of progressives who adore Amy Goodman and who will be infuriated when they see this -- the "conspiracy theorist" thugs, is how they'll see us.

The way to do it is how it has been done before, and it worked. True, Amy undermined Griffin in a number of ways, but Griffin, at that time, was also relying in some poor sources for research and so presented an easy target.

Here's what they did:

Action #1: Waking Amy!
Help us get David Ray Griffin on Democracy Now!
(Forward this page to others. Get your friends involved!)
May 13th Update - BREAKTHROUGH!

Thank you everyone who participated in our "Waking Amy" campaign. Your emails and phone calls to Democracy Now asking them to have David Ray Griffin on the show have paid off. Last week a group of us from the 9-11 Visibility Project met with Amy Goodman when she was here in Seattle on her book tour. After acknowledging she had received hundreds of emails, she told us she was definitely going to have Dr. Griffin on her show. I also called the studio today and spoke with producer Sharif Abdel Kouddous, who confirmed this. He said he was going to call Dr. Griffin's publisher, Interlink Press, immediately and set up a date for the interview.

This is a major breakthrough! Dr. Griffin is the author of the book, "The New Pearl Harbor," which provides a sober and rational analysis of the evidence for US Government complicity in the events of 9/11. Democracy Now reaches hundreds of thousands of viewers/listeners around the world, and is a mainstay for the peace and justice movement in the US.

Now is the time to thank Amy and the producers and staff of Democracy Now. This is just as important as your earlier emails. We need to show them our support for their decision, which could trigger a shift in the alternative media's overall coverage of the 9/11 issue. Please send the following email to Amy and the Democracy Now staff:

Sample Letter
(copy and paste or use your own words)

Dear Amy and the folks at Democracy Now,

Thank you for committing to having Dr. David Ray Griffin on your show. This is a crucial step forward for the 9/11 families and citizens of the world who have been demanding for almost three years truth and accountability regarding likely Bush Administration complicity in the event of 9/11. Please contact the 9-11 Visibility Project as soon as you have a date for Dr. Griffin's interview, so they can help promote the show.

Thank you and sincerely,


* First off, note that the primary reason Democracy Now is considering having David Ray Griffin on the show is because his book (certain to be attacked as "conspiracy theory") has been endorsed by none other than Howard Zinn, author of "A People's History of the United States." Zinn--along with Richard Falk, who wrote the Foreword--is the most prominent left academic in the US to date (in league with Noam Chomsky) to endorse the full critique of the official story of 9-11. Others are certain follow his example, since many have simply been waiting for an opportune time to come forward. So be sure in your emails and phone calls to Democracy Now that you mention Howard Zinn's endorsement of Griffin's book.

* Next, be aware the alternative left media has been traditionally hesitant to address issues easily attacked as "conspiracy theories." Unfortunately, the conspiracy theory label has been effectively used in the past to marginalize dissident voices. To deflect these attacks, the left media chooses to frame their perspective using what they describe as an "institutional analysis" rather than a "conspiracy analysis." The idea is that US foreign aggression is the logical and expected consequence of corporate, profit-based institutions. Of course there is no contradiction between the two types of analysis. The point is simply to be aware of this perspective when you speak or write to them. For example, you may want to use the word "complicity" rather than "conspiracy" in your emails and phone calls.

* Remember to always be polite. Thank them for their commitment to peace and justice and for covering issues (like Haiti) typically ignored by the corporate media. Remind them that the Bush Administration's complicity in 9-11 is one of these same issues, and that 9-11 continues to be the driving force behind the war on terror.

This is a method that has a proven track record, so why ignore it and replace it with screaming in a bullhorn like a LaRouchite? Dems and progressives have been attacked like that by LaRouchites for many years and that's how they'll see it.

And then later, DemNow had the Loose Change guys on.

Some of us begged them to have the scientists on instead, but they didn't, and the LC guys wouldn't step aside for them either. So we lost that chance.

But we could create another, if we wanted.

The way to get Richard, Steve, Kevin, etc. on Democracy Now is to petition them in an organized campaign, not by screaming in bullhorns in audiences who adore Amy, and for good reason.

John B -- I think as someone in Australia you may not realize how many people love Amy and will depise anyone who tries to humiliate her in this way. This will primarily alienate us from the hardcore of the left and progressives in the US.

you right wingers are stupid

I'm really disappointed by how many crazy right wingers are showing up here nowadays. You are so dumb. We know the perpetrators' motives for 9/11 and the resource wars. They did it because it was necessary to sustain their unsustainable system, capitalism. I think it's funny how successful the Libertarian party has been at recruiting from the 9/11 truth movement. Don't you AJ fanboys realize that you are the controlled opposition. The oligarchs are succeeding at getting dissenters to support the Republican party and help push for their end goal of completely unregulated free market capitalism. They have to rofl when they think about you guys. Sure Ron Paul can write some decent speeches, but really, has he ever accomplished anything? I don't think so, otherwise he would have been savaged the way that they do to politicians that are actually making waves. All you right wingers can bitch and moan about left gatekeepers all day, because when it comes down to it TPTB aren't gonna do anything to you because at the end of the day you're still their minion. They might think you're misguided because you have a conscious, but they'll let you slide because you're indoctrinated well enough that they can put you to work in the house. So sure, with the view from your secure glass house community I bet it is real easy to summon up the courage to take the risk of, maybe alienating some people that think you're weird for you quirky views. But us leftists are dealing with a double standard. We're persona non grata in this country, hell, in this world even. TPTB , when dealing with leftists, don't hesitate to intimidate those that can be intimidated, imprison those that can be set up, socially isolate through slander, economically isolate by blacklisting from employment, and assassinate those that can't be subdued by other means. Sure some people are fearless when it comes to their own life, but what about when they start going after the people you know, people that don't have anything to do with the cause. Is it right to do the right thing if it will cause innocent people to be harmed, people that never decided to take a risk. Try pondering on that. I know it's hard for you because you haven't developed the ability to empathize yet, if you could do that you wouldn't be a right winger. At least I can take solace in knowing that it is relatively easy to deprogram the average victim of your brainwashing. Every leftist I know is a 9/11 truther. Everyone I know that still believes the myth is a right winger. Take comfort in knowing that there are still some people that take stupidity to greater lengths than you do. So yeah, the left doesn't want to work with you right wing truthers because you're not worth the time to speak to, we don't want your limited hangout solutions, and we don't need half-wits hanging around. We know what needs to done, we don't need your input. If you didn't get offended by Empire Inc. until 9/11 then that doesn't say much about your integrity. You're probably just some nationalist that's really only bothered because you had to admit that even you could end up the victim. You probably think that 3,000 dead Americans is a greater tragedy than 1,000,000 dead Iraqis.

PS. From my first hand experience with WAC operatives I would say they have a negative impact on the TM. I feel they underminded our efforts in Cleveland by trying to divert our monetary efforts away from putting out dvds of Improbable Collapse with DRG speeches, and opting for Terrorstorm instead. I also feel they were trying to prop up Alex Jones as leader of the movement, whom even if he is sincere, is still a capitalist tool that is at least part racist.

George Washington's advice regarding partisanship

George Washington's Farewell Address To the People of the United States

All obstructions to the execution of the Laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation, the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels, and modified by mutual interests.

18 However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people, and to usurp for themselves the reins of government; destroying afterwards the very engines, which have lifted them to unjust dominion.

Someone voted this down without comment?

I am stunned that my contribution received a negative vote without comment. I can speculate as to why this happened, but I would like to read what the person rejecting this advice has to say on the matter.

you don't show up as a

you don't show up as a negative vote on my screen.

Not bad advice, but I would

Not bad advice, but I would have rather given George Washington advice. I would have said the following.
I think you should listen to Thomas Jefferson's views on the inherent equality of all the people God put here on earth. If we're going to fight and die for change and freedom we should do the right thing and abolish slavery in this fledgeling country. I know it would be unpopular in the southern colonies, but screw them. They're a bunch of backwards hicks. If they don't like it, seize their lands and allot them to the laborers that were farming it. Oh and this voting rights plan, only white males land owners, really? Are you really succeeding in being non-partisan for the good of the country if only you and the guys you hang out with are the only ones that are given a say. Non-partisanship through the exclusion of everyone that's different. It works, but I'm not sure the public is ready to appreciate such Orwellian concepts yet, give em a couple hundred years. Oh and the native situation. On that one I think I'd go the full integration route. Grant them full citizenship and write them up the deeds for their ancestral lands. Going about it any other way is liable to end up in a long bloody struggle that will end up tantamount to genocide by the time its all said and done with. And finally, if I were you I'd make a law to protect the right to smoke that ganja you grow at home. Otherwise some fascist newspaper magnate is liable to come around and get it prohibited to fuck with blacks and latinos. I'll see you later, I gotta go catch up with Doc Brown.

Perhaps you should read about what Washington actually did

Washington could not simply free his slaves because his relatives would have claimed them as their property. The only way he could free his slaves was through his last will and testament. If he had freed his own slaves upon his death, he would have created a situation in which his slaves would be free, but his wife's slaves would not be free. Since these families were intermarried, he thought it would too great a burden for them to bear. The only way his wife's slaves could be freed without her relatives claiming them was through her will. So he made provisions in his will that his slaves would be freed upon her death. And her will bequeathed the freedom of her slaves. So George Washington freed his slaves in the only way he could have.

The only "guy" I hang out with on a regular basis is my Afro-Jamaican girlfriend. I have no control over this, or any other 9/11 site or group.

Actually, I think you are probably a troll, and will probably ignore you from now on.

I don't presume you to share

I don't presume you to share the same shortcomings as our founding fathers. In fact I'd hope you share the same views as myself seeing as we share the wisdom of a couple hundred years of hindsight.

And technically, he could have freed his slaves pre-mortem by abolishing slavery. There was an abolitionist movement at the time, and abolition was recommended by Thomas Jefferson at the time of the writing of Declaration of Independence. Instead Washington failed the test of integrity and chose to insure his family's economic well being by safeguarding his farm's access to forced labor.

And I'm not a troll, I don't play WoW. Plus it would be ironic if you ignored me. I had decided to comment on your advice to me just because you were the only person I hadn't responded to, I saw how you were bothered by how someone perceived what you had said, and so I decided to give you some feedback so you wouldn't feel left out.

I am certainly not a rightwinger however:

The left is gone! And what's left are gatekeepers with no real GUTS to do the right thing! I peronally feel that 1,000,000 dead Iraqis is a greater tragedy than 3,000 Americans. I think the Libertarian "no regulation" concept is NONSENSE. Let me know when you want your neighbor to have the right to drain his sewage off his property on to yours or someone else. However, WAC has demonstrated time again they do have the GUTS fo confront the powerbrokers and media fakes. Alex Jones is not perfect but who is? I happen to know Leftists who still don't believe 911 was an inside job. Mostly they believe someone like Goodman or Chomsky would be saying something about it etc. And the Democrats have failed time and time again to truly represent the peacemakers or procecute the warmongers.

9/11 truth is a non partisan issue

that transcends partisanship because it goes directly to the basic rule of law on which any truly civilized society must be founded.

The corruption and criminality that created 9/11 and continues the cover-up is not a left-right issue, but an attack on all human beings, regardless of their political philosophy.

Please do not engage in ad hominem attacks, they only perpetuate artificial divisions that allow the 9/11 criminals to maintain their positions of power.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

it really isn't though

9/11 truth isn't really a non-partisan issue. 9/11 was carried out by far right militarists and industrialists. It's domestic goal is attacking civil rights, silencing dissent, and putting into place a new kind of infrastructure (T.I.A.) giving TPTB a new level of ability to control society through economic, military, and media manipulation. A subtle, nuanced CHATTEL 2.0 if you will. 9/11 was just another salvo when you look at the big picture as a whole. The American people (and the rest of the world) lost the cold war when the US government won it. Capitalism is the greatest threat to freedom in the world today. Everything we want (direct democracy, free press, honest elections, quality education and healthcare for all, an end to poverty (unemployment, malnutrition, homelessness), rehabilitating instead of incarcerating people suffering from drug addiction), all these noble goals and desires for a better future for humanity, they are all incompatible with capitalism. Capitalism's bottom line says there will always be more profit in subverting these goals. At best it will pay them lip service as beautiful ideals, never achievable in this tragically flawed world. But the reality is that all these goals are attainable, and all it'll take is the worldwide abandonment of capitalism.

Break free from the constraints

"It's domestic goal is attacking civil rights, silencing dissent, and putting into place a new kind of infrastructure (T.I.A.) giving TPTB a new level of ability to control society through economic, military, and media manipulation."

And that is exactly what the Left Wing is doing right now. DJ_Damo, you need to break yourself free of the right/left paradigm. It is a false one. By aligning yourself with one or the other, you become vulnerable to accepting a broad spectrum of ideals that would otherwise go against your heart were you not so caught up in being a part of the 'team', or part of a 'higher morality.'

I was once a die hard liberal, but I have now become more discerning in what I accept as truth. We are being lied to about everything my friend. It's up to us to do the best we can to grab onto truths, no matter which side it comes from, left or right.

Right wingers are blending with left wingers more than ever since the origins of the experiment known as the Republic of the united States of America.

Break free from the constraints put on you by the false left/right paradigm; otherwise, you will be on the sidelines during the current great push toward freedom happening right now in every state of this republic.


Left-Right is a puppet show

The biggest differences between BHO and GWB are the ability to speak in complete and coherent sentences, and complexion. Attempting to understand 9/11 in terms of Left vs Right, Conservative vs Liberal would be like trying to understand a theft in terms of distractor vs pickpocket. A great example of how this works is Hummergate, in which Slick Willie and the Hutchinson brothers staged a big political scandal over a blow job, all the while covering up the real crimes of Mena. See: High on Terror: 9/11 and the Illicit Drug Trade for more information on the bipartisan nature of high crimes of state.