Wikileaks founder Julian Assange is 'annoyed' by 9/11 truth
"Wanted by the CIA: Wikileaks founder Julian Assange"
Belfast Telegraph, July 19, 2010
In this interview, Belfast Telegraph reporter Matthew Bell asks Wikileaks founder Julian Assange about "conspiracy theories". Assange subsequently explains his position.
His obsession with secrecy, both in others and maintaining his own, lends him the air of a conspiracy theorist. Is he one? "I believe in facts about conspiracies," he says, choosing his words slowly. "Any time people with power plan in secret, they are conducting a conspiracy. So there are conspiracies everywhere. There are also crazed conspiracy theories. It's important not to confuse these two. Generally, when there's enough facts about a conspiracy we simply call this news." What about 9/11? "I'm constantly annoyed that people are distracted by false conspiracies such as 9/11, when all around we provide evidence of real conspiracies, for war or mass financial fraud." What about the Bilderberg conference? "That is vaguely conspiratorial, in a networking sense. We have published their meeting notes."
Mr. Assange seems to have conveniently forgotten that 9/11 may be, in a very concrete sense, a 'conspiracy for war', leading directly to the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and the permanent "War on Terror".
In November 2009, Wikileaks released "half a million US national text pager intercepts" covering a "24 hour period surrounding the September 11, 2001 attacks in New York and Washington."[1] This is all commendable. However, given Mr. Assange's rather curious disposition towards 9/11 truth, how much effort can we really expect from Wikileaks in the future?
Perhaps it should be pointed out to Mr. Assange that former senator Bob Graham, who chaired the United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence when it performed its Joint Inquiry[2] into 9/11, gave an interview to the BBC in which Graham said the following:[3]
Bob Graham: "I can just state that within 9/11 there are too many secrets, that is information that has not been made available to the public for which there are specific tangible credible answers and that that withholding of those secrets has eroded public confidence in their government as it relates to their own security."
Narrator: "Senator Graham found that the cover-up led to the heart of the administration."
Bob Graham: "I called the White House and talked with Ms. Rice and said: "Look, we've been told we're gonna get cooperation in this inquiry and she said she'd look into it and nothing happened."
Interviewer: "Was there any sort of sense of embarrassment or apology or...?"
Bob Graham: "No. Embarrassment, apology, regret, those are not characteristics associated with the current White House."
Interviewer: "So it was a conspiracy to cover-up the fact that blunders had been made in the lead up to 9/11?"
Bob Graham: "If by conspiracy you mean, more than one person involved, yes, there was more than one person and there was some ... collaboration of efforts among agencies and the administration to keep information out of the public's hands."
The BBC then concludes their documentary with a reassuring, paternalistic commentary explaining why this isn't something we should all be furious about. Furthermore, in 2009, 9/11 commissioner Bob Kerrey said, in a candid dialogue with We Are Change LA:[4]
Bob Kerrey: "It's a problem... it's a 30-year-old conspiracy"
Jeremy Rothe-Kushel: "No.. I'm talking about 9/11"
Bob Kerrey: "That's what I'm talking about"
Many interpretations could be given as to what sort of conspiracy these two former senators are referring to. The BBC documentary "Conspiracy Files: 9-11" was an obvious hit piece against 9/11 truth, in which the BBC went out of their way to handwave all abnormalities as 'blunders', 'failures', 'mistakes' and 'cock ups'. This angle is not new, in fact, it's part of a long BBC tradition of 'limited hangouts'. Nor is it any less outrageous if it were true that these 'blunders' and 'gaffes' were deliberately covered up, as the BBC and Bob Graham allege. A criminal cover-up alone warrants criminal prosecution of the conspirators involved, and most 9/11 researchers know this is merely the tip of the iceberg. Bob Kerrey's remark could be taken to mean the covert funding and training of the Mujahideen, initiated in 1979.[5]
Nobody is asking Mr. Assange to depart from his objective role, but now that he has spoken out, he deserves a reply. In both cases, clearly the terminology used is "conspiracy" or "cover-up". Bob Graham doesn't hold back and mentions "withholding of (..) secrets", chastising the Bush administration for being unapologetic, self-serving and obstructive. So it seems that Julian Assange, as the founder and director of an organization supposedly dedicated to supporting whistleblowers who expose government wrongdoing, has his work cut out for him, unless he is determined to be part of the problem. The perception management and misguided credibility building Mr. Assange seems so concerned with conflict with the stated mission of Wikileaks:[6]
"WikiLeaks is a multi-jurisdictional public service designed to protect whistleblowers, journalists and activists who have sensitive materials to communicate to the public."
I bet whistleblowers Sibel Edmonds[7] and certainly Daniel Ellsberg[8], who is mentioned several times in the mission statement, approve. Surely, a 9/11 cover-up that "led to the heart of the administration" is worthy of Wikileaks' attention. Or is it?
[1] "9/11 tragedy pager intercepts" — http://911.wikileaks.org/
[2] 9/11 Joint Inquiry — http://www.gpoaccess.gov/serialset/creports/911.html
[3] Relevant excerpt from the 2007 BBC documentary "Conspiracy Files: 9-11" — http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6QLnvvyIzg/
[4] We Are Change LA: "9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey finally confesses 9-11 Commission could not do it's job"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtJWBcWAeAw#t=6m45
[5] Operation Cyclone — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Cyclone
[6] Wikileaks mission statement — http://wikileaks.org/wiki/WikiLeaks:About
[7] Documentary "Sibel Edmonds: Kill The Messenger" — http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6063340745569143497
[8] Sibel Edmonds, Daniel Ellsberg together — http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-aSbmRHqKL4
- SnowCrash's blog
- Login to post comments
Bob Kerrey: "It's a problem... it's a 30-year-old conspiracy
Jeremy Rothe-Kushel: "No.. I'm talking about 9/11"
Bob Kerrey: "That's what I'm talking about"
could wikileaks be a limited hangout?
If he can't see the 911 conspiracy, which is blatantly obvious, I have concerns.
I suspect that wikileaks is a limited hangout.
Limited hangout or CIA front.
Cryptome.org founder, Wikileaks co-founder and architect John Young has raised some serious concerns about Wikileaks:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20011106-281.html
I would put good money on it being a CIA front.
When were the twin towers constructed?
Let's see, since Google is my friend..
Started 1966, the first tower opened in 1970, the second in 1972
That would make it a 30 conspiracy then, if he was referring to the twin towers, as if built by Rockefellers, with the end in mind..
just a thought..
Jeremy strikes again. Man he's great!
Trying to interpret
Trying to interpret Kerrey's comment has come up on this blog before. He made the remark a year or so ago, so the 30 years may have been a reference to the late '70s--which, among other things, was when the CIA began organizing the mujahideen in Afghanistan, and US policymakers in general were becoming more anxious about the need to strengthen its military presence in that region over the long-term. He may have been thinking along those lines.
Of course
who can say what he might have been referring to. I understand.
Your comment reminds me of the film "The Power of Nightmares", ever see it?
Me I've always felt that something fundamental went haywire when JFK was assassinated, and that that event led to an alternative history through which the Bush crime family rose to power, much like a branch of history hacked away, and a new one grafted in in its place.
Either way, these things do cut to the very heart of American life, and they're not good.
I think the same documentarian who did the power of nightmares, also made another film on the rise of advertising via think tanks designed to craft methods for all manner of psychological warfare, like the Tavistock Institute for example. The "mass-man" - created by design as the very infrastructure and framework through which the elite 'catalyze' and direct and bend history in favour of the type of global conspiracy JFK warned about..
Sorry for going off topic.
"The Century of the Self" ADAM CURTIS
an excerpt:
All Adam Curtis Films are Here:
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/search/?cx=partner-pub-2600122794880266%3...
Help me find USAF officer who imagined 9/11 high-jacking story!
Some elements of this massive psychological warfare operation on the US public, and the World at large originated already way back in the 1930ies! MacWhite wrote a very good text on "Television and the Hive Mind" http://www.mackwhite.com/tv.html . Cheney and Rumsfeld worked on the small text of the "Continuity of Government Plan" that went into effect at 11 AM on Sept 11th 2001, already during 20 years BEFORE Cheney became Vice President, and Rumsfeld became Secretary of Defense. Remember also the US Air-force soldier who became infuriated when he realized the Psy-Ops had used HIS PLAN, that he had devised 20 years before, when he was stationed in Wiesbaden, Germany. Conceived as a hypothetical terrorist attack at the time, where terrorists would use box-cutters to take over the plane, and the do a Kamikaze strike on an important building, the Air-Force officer immediately understood that the plan could easily be turned into a "False Flag" operation, and, in a very unusual move, demanded guarantees from the Military that HIS PLAN would never be put into application by the US forces. That is why he became furious after September 11th 2001! This all sounds all a bit far stretched, but as I recall it, it was very much talked in the 9/11 Truth community a couple of years after Sept. 11th 2001. 9 years later, I tried to find links to this story, but so far, my search has failed. Are there other 9/11 historians out there who can track down this story, that also must have been run on 911Blogger?
Of-course it was at-least 30 years in the making: Kerry was absolutely right, but it is a close nit group of (criminal) actors, including the likes of Philip Zelikow who played an important part in the cover-up.
Track down who is doing the very active covering-up, and you will find the perpetrators.
Every media today, every University who cannot manage to understand that the WTC towers I, II & VII were taken down by pre-planted explosives, these are either totally unreliable sources of knowledge, or are guilty of not reporting the treasonous acts of elements within the highest echelons of our "security" apparatus.
For every day that goes in the infamy of their ignorance or treason, they should be severely shamed!
Perhaps the COG plan you point out
could have been the 30 year old conspiracy event kerrey talked about.
I wouldn't go too hard on Mr.
I wouldn't go too hard on Mr. Assange here. He's doing dangerous and important work. He evidently hasn't traveled down the rabbit hole deep enough. Maybe his friends should point him towards this web site or http://Visibility911.com or http://ae911truth.org
or http://russbaker.com
And he should check out David Chandler's work at http://911speakout.org
Give the guy some useful information rather than
negative vibes.
I beg to disagree!
I must say I disagree most vehemently with your suggestion that we go easy on Mr. Assange, as if he were some academic lost in the clouds who needs gentle encouragement.
Julian Assange specialises in leaking explosive information on highly sensitive topics that are suppressed in the news. He has NO EXCUSE not to know about the myriad of facts which contradict the official 9/11 story.
I'm quite disgusted to find that he is propping the most egregious lie of our age.
Sorry, but I'll go hard. If this report is correct (and it may not be of course) then this guy is clearly controlled & clearly a fake. This would be very disappointing to me.
I second that..
We can't be easy on someone of his position who apparently owes his fame to the acknowledment of conspiracies and lying and providing a method for those conspiracies and lies to be exposed. By making a statement like he did about 9/11 truth, he prevents anyone who DOES have inside information on 9/11 from giving it to him since they now know he won't believe them. The first time Assange showed up on MSM TV, I had a sneaking suspicion about this guy. He isn't going to leak ANYTHING the CIA doesn't want him to. He is just another propaganda tool. Was it Stalin who said "the best way to control the opposition is to be it?"
Our best weapon is an educated public. I still like the idea of 9/11 science fairs.
peace all
dtg
Ok...so what are you going to
Ok...so what are you going to do with your vehemence? Blog here till you're blue in the face? Have you tried sending Mr. Assange a letter presenting him with the best information our movement has to offer? Jones, Griffin, Gage, Chandler, Monahan, Wolsey, Ryan, Harrit to name a few? If you present him with harsh condemnation at first take, just how receptive do you think he'll be at listening to our best? Where's your action plan?
I think I was there when Bell questioned “What about 9/11?" !
On June 21st I met Julian Assange at a seminar organized by the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe. He was a bit jet-lagged after just flying in from Sydney, but still seemed like an easy-going cosmopolitan traveler. He was standing in the entrance of the European Parliament in the company of a very special and likable politician – Icelandic poet and artist, former Punk-singer now Icelandic Parliament member Birgitta Jonsdottir ( http://joyb.blogspot.com )
I noted that Julian Assange was well versed in the security passes needed to get into certain meetings of the European Parliament. I believe it was during the press conference for the seminar " (self) censorship; new challenges for freedom of expression in Europe " that Belfast Telegraph reporter Matthew Bell had the chance to ask him that question. I had slipped in to this press conference almost by accident, as I was early for the hearing that was about to take place. I remember the question, and it is funny that at the time, the answer to the question “What about 9/11” didn’t shock me more than it did, when he answered it cautiously. The quote from the Belfast Telegraph reporter could be a journalist’s short-hand of Assange’s answer. As I recall it, he tip-toed around the question, indeed saying that there were many established facts about government lying that WikiLeaks could contribute, showing black-on white how we are manipulated into war and mass financial fraud. I do not recall Assange using the words: “false conspiracies such as 9/11” because that would have profoundly revolted me.
This being said, I do not have the audio of the press conference: it should be available somewhere. It is possible that I could have repressed hearing such an absurdity from Assange’s mouth. Now that I think back about it, it could be he said “un-proven theories”, and already that IS bad enough!
Both he and Birgitta Jonsdottir were like hero’s to me, but I agree entirely that, after 9 years of serious citizen investigation, like that done by www.911Truth.org or www.911Blogger.com , the issue of 9/11 IS the ultimate litmus test to see if a journalist / politician is informed, and working for a better understanding of reality, or a victim/perpertrator of the Mighty Wurlitzer supidification meme that high-rises pulverize with their occupants in New-York due to barbaric Muslims high-jacking airplanes with box-cutters.
As a participant citizen in a hearing entitled: "(self) censorship; new challenges for freedom of expression in Europe" http://www.alde.eu/en/details/?no_cache=1&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=23424&cHash=137ca875fb fumbling a bit awkwardly to find the right words, I tried to steer the discussion to the issue of 9/11 : see my own intervention at 2 hours 26 min on this video link of the full seminar: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xdsqw8_alev-full-freedom-of-expression-in_news ( watch at 2:26:00 ).
I will send this link to Birgitta Jonsdottir, who is still a hero to me, even if I do not recall any of her thoughts on September 11th 2001. How many sitting politicians do you know who write poems like this: Cry from the Heart
Birgitta Jonsdottir would be as inspiring as Cynthia Mc Kinney to me if she also gave full support to the WeAreChange 911Truth Citizen movement of the World. I believe she hasn’t arrived there yet, because she lives in a Scandinavian “duck-pond” mentality where people just don’t do such dastardly things as a psychological ware-fare operations killing 3000 of its own citizens to put the country in a State of Emergency due to “external attack”, and implement a phony “War on Terrorism”.
Julian Assange, with a broader back-ground in government lies, should know better: he should come clear about any remark he would have done implying that September 11th 2001 being a government inside job “is not proven”. It is clearly proven by peer-reviewed scientific journals proving the use of tons of expensive Pentagon High-Tech sol-gel-nano-thermate, and the collective scientific opinion as expressed by more than 1200 architects and engineers on the excellent site of www.AE911Truth.org
I still tend to believe Assange is passionate about his work, but if you’re out to leak some essential documents, there is no need to only go via WikiLeaks. The Icelandic Media Initiative is on a good way towards realization, and the Swedish Pirate party is also setting up a site with Parliamentary immunity and secrecy to ensure that the internet stays a source of information and freedom of expression and thought.
Best regards from Brussels, Belgium,
Dr Eric Beeth
http://patriotsquestion911.com/medical.html#Beeth
"The Icelandic Media
"The Icelandic Media Initiative is on a good way towards realization, and the Swedish Pirate party is also setting up a site with Parliamentary immunity and secrecy to ensure that the internet stays a source of information and freedom of expression and thought. "
That's great news Dr. Beeth
Can you write more about that?
John
I spoke too early: Only WikyLeaks is currently up and running.
The Icelandic Modern Media Initiative (1 year from completion) has more substance and philosophy than the Swedish Pirate Party Initiative (only local beta version running in the University town of Lund), but it’s good to see a multi-thronged drive to protect from “Big Brother’s” all the more prying eyes through efforts like DARPA’s TIA program : http://www.aclu.org/technology-and-liberty/qa-pentagons-total-information-awareness-program .
Here's a good link on : The Icelandic Modern Media Initiative : http://www.immi.is/?l=en
The Pirate Party says : "Terrorists may attack the open society, but only governments can abolish it." http://www.piratpartiet.se/international/english Here is the first link I stumbled on concerning their "Log-Free-ISP" http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/07/swedish-pirate-party-launches-anonymous-log-free-isp.ars
Note to editors : working from another computer, I wanted to edit the invented word “Mighty Wurlitzer supidification meme” to “Mighty Wurlitzer stupidification meme” in my comment above, but it didn’t’ work. If possible, please correct!
Eric
Confirmation of Julian Assange's comment?
Very interesting post Dr Beeth. I believe it is crucial to obtain confirmation of Julian Assange's exact comments.
In the Belfast Telegraph article, the journalist, Matthew Bell, states that he spoke to Julian Assange after his talk at the Centre for Investigative Journalism at the University of London on the weekend of 9 to 11 July 2010.
However, I still find Dr Beeth's comment about Mr Assange's cautious remarks on 9/11 two weeks earlier very interesting:
"I remember the question, and it is funny that at the time, the answer to the question “What about 9/11” didn’t shock me more than it did, when he answered it cautiously. The quote from the Belfast Telegraph reporter could be a journalist’s short-hand of Assange’s answer. As I recall it, he tip-toed around the question, indeed saying that there were many established facts about government lying that WikiLeaks could contribute, showing black-on white how we are manipulated into war and mass financial fraud. I do not recall Assange using the words: “false conspiracies such as 9/11” because that would have profoundly revolted me."
Was Julian Assange misquoted? First prize to whoever can obtain confirmation of this quote.
How Julian Assange views September 11th 2001.
Dear Naomi and fellow truth-tellers and truth-seekers,
If I were to adventure a "diagnosis" of how Julian Assange views September 11th 2001, based on a very brief meeting, and what I've been able to piece together, then it would be something like this:
Apparently, he views it like an intellectual who made up his mind about the matter early-on, and has not been showing signs of budging his opinion, even post-publication of the Niels Harrit Nano-thermate papers, the DVD's put out by AE911Truth, or the American Behavioral Psychologist publication of the SCAD papers in its February 2010 issue. He is caught in the "Monbiot" or "Chomsky" mindset, who both seem to believe that JFK was murdered by a lone nut-case, and that, according to them, other theories of high ranking secret government involvement in the killing of the elected US President are fruitless "conspiracy theories". These distinguished intellectuals take exactly the same attitude towards any proof of high ranking secret government involvement in the killing of 3000 American citizens on September 11th 2001.
These types of intellectuals are comforted in this mind-set, and they would probably feel quite destabilized to discover that they have been wrong all this time.
All that Chomsky, Monbiot and Assange say and do is not in-validated by this error of perception, but it is quite un-nerving to watch them prance around proposing to help others to clear the grain of dust out of their eyes, while they do not realize that they are walking around with a log in their own eye.
Unfortunately, 9 years after the treasonous acts of 9/11, a lot of intellectuals are still firmly hiding the plain truth from their eyes, by firmly tying the main-stream curtain of lies in front of their eyes, and continuing to waltz about taking themselves very seriously. I know and appreciate very many of these people, but I often have difficulty discussing truly serious matters with them, because of their fear to tread the deep waters of proof of very large scale State Crimes Against Democracy still alive and kicking because of deaf and blind intellectuals like themselves.
I hope and pray that all those who do understand the nature of the threat of not addressing the criminals behind the recently committed SCADs will make haste to make more people understand, and act to guarantee that our society keep it's basis in decency and justice. I am convinced that the Icelandic Modern Media Initiative is firmly on this course, and people working within WikiLeaks are committed to guaranteeing a more free flowing of information, in an information society that is under an enemy attack of authoritarian elements within our society, who desire to reign in the free sharing of thought and information, to better control "the masses".
It is quite surprising to hear the director of WikiLeaks refer to the 1200 architects and engineers who expose the proof of controlled demolition of the WTC I, II & VII as if they were on to a "false conspiracy", but the same surprise comes unfortunately still today from many so-called intellectuals, like university professors and other nerds. Today, I have it from a good source that several of the core members of WikiLeaks are not at all naive about the findings of the world wide Citizen's forensic investigation into what happened on September 11th 2001. I will leave it to each of these precious members to come out in public about their findings concerning 9/11 Truth. Knowing how stubborn some intellectuals like Monbiot or Chomsky can be, I'm not expecting Julian Assange to become a 9/11 Truther until 90% of the intellectuals around him have become more conscious about the facts proving that 9/11 was a State Crime Against Democracy, as well as the most bold operation of psychological warfare ever attempted on a global television dumbfounded populace.
I would like to thank each one of you, 9/11 Truther or not, if you are on the same path to bring about more decency and access to truth in our society.
In particular, I'd like to thank every person who sacrifices of his energy and time to guarantee a free flow of-information, and a better understanding of the realities that confront our society today, in a matter of-fact way, without sugar coating or trying to put a Mighty Wurlitzer spin on this very important information flow!
Thank-you especially to the community of bloggers !
Dr Eric Beeth
http://patriotsquestion911.com/medical.html#Beeth
I would suggest he needs to be approached WAC style
... and the video posted. - similar to the Amy Goodman WAC confrontations
Of course it would be preferable to interview him in a mutually satisfactory manner, but it doesn;t look like that is on the cards. Sending him information seems a bit pointless.
Actually I would start by just getting him to clarify his comment - it's quite likely he was deliberately mis-quoted by Matthew Bell.
I am going to start the ball rolling and send him an email asking for clarification - as a fellow Australian truth seeker.
manipulation psychology of Julian Assange?
If you were Julian Assange and already had a big fat [encrypted] file on 9/11, and were asked about 911 publicly, would you tip your hand (wanting an ace) to those who prefer obfuscation? Suppose he has some evidence but not the whole picture yet. It is to his great advantage to pooh-pooh 911 truth seekers. Thus he is more likely to be contacted by those with evidence who yearn for the facts to be presented. Voicing doubts about the publicly accepted story of 911 would elicit the opposite result: What individual with information would wish to stick his neck out by providing evidence if Assange suggests he may already have it? Mr. Assange must be very aware of the peril of speaking too soon, and the advantage of portraying himself as ill-informed.
Irony
When digging around looking for contact info for Julian Assange, I stumbled across a quote from him suggesting "You can’t publish a paper on physics without the full experimental data and results." Of course not only could Bazant publish his papers on the destruction of the towers without providing any experimental data at all, but his hypothesis stands in flagrant violation of the laws of physics, and easily debunked by simple experiments such as those done by Jon Cole.
Unfortunately, I've wasn't able to find a personal email adress for him, so I settled for emailing the WikiLeaks office.
Hypothesis:
Perhaps Wikileaks is the mother-of-all limited hangouts, in that they will reveal seriously damaging evidence, however they are very selective with this evidence for damage control. For instance, with the 'collateral murder' video leak, the general reaction was anger towards our ignorant and brainwashed men in uniform instead of at the willfully evil men in suits who killed us, lied to us about it, then shipped our men over in the first place.
Wikileaks comes away looking like a saint, while further dividing We the People, by design.
Given Assange's reaction, I can only assume he is playing his role as gatekeeper, or needs a weekend visit from Harrit & Gage...
Strange
I was just thinking about the wiwleaks founder and what he might have receieved regardfing 9/11, and why he might withold on that particular issue.
He said he's sitting on "explosive" stuff, and I was hoping that might be revelations about 9/11, for which I am CERTAIN he must have recieved something or more than something along the way.
What a sell out.
How does he deny the laws of physics? That's the part I don't get. He's a smart guy. He knows - but is here cowtowing to the sacred cow of the elite agenda. Strange, and shameful.
He'll be getting a dose of the truth I'm pretty sure now..
What better way to catch
What better way to catch whistle blowers & contain leaks than to secretly become THE ' place you can trust ' to reveal the secrets to the world? Of course ,it would be necessary to expose some small potato scandals (easily fixed by rolling a few low level heads) in order to maintain your reputation,but they could then be pointed to as evidence that your legit. 911 is my litmus test & he fails. I predict Wikileaks will NEVER report anything other than small,easily fixed 'scandals'. Anyone who 'leaked' anything big or important to them would disappear & you'd never hear about. It sort of looks like a sting operation to me. Just my opinion.
yes, 9/11 is the litmus test...
. . . and this bloke fails miserably. another gatekeeper revelaed
Limited Hangout...most likely...but
Hey all, this is a great thread...
That we are good enough to be reasonable as we consider that Asange is most likely a limited hangout, and also most likely operating with a gun to his head because of his organization being "conveniently supplied with incriminating videos and other forms of classified? information" and further, most likely infiltrated as most of our organizations are, is a very BIG compliment to the 9/11 Truth for World Peace and Justice Community.
This 9/11 story is FAR from over...so lets just keep moving towards the TRUTH.
Seems the HI PERPS have alotta problems with this "Truthy Thing".
9/11 Truth for World peace and Justice
Robin Hordon
Kingston, WA
The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Penta
The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers/ NOW ON DVD
http://www.mostdangerousman.org/
http://911blogger.com/news/2010-07-21/most-dangerous-man-america-daniel-...
whatever
deleted
Stay calm!
I think we should take Assange's comments here with a pinch of salt. He strikes me as someone who has learned to be very cautious about what he reveals of himself to other people. If Assange has suspicions about the official 9/11 story, I really doubt he would admit this to someone he has never met before, such as a journalist from a major newspaper. So I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt over this.
Sounds Just Like Chomsky-Biggest Fraud Out There!
"I'm constantly annoyed that people are distracted by false conspiracies such as 9/11, when all around we provide evidence of real conspiracies, for war or mass financial fraud."
Here is the video accompanying the Belfast Telegraph article: