Donna O'Connor Statement on Olbermann Based on Unproven Allegations

By Jeff Jacobucci/ 

In a recent interview with Keith Olbermann of MSNBC, September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows national spokesperson Donn Marsh O'Connor delivered an emotional statement in support of construction of the Muslim community center six blocks from the site of the former WTC and the crimes and murders of 9/11/01. 

Having lost her own child in crimes of 9/11, her voice and face showed great emotion that was not lost upon her respected MSNBC interviewer, Keith Olbermann. 

There was only one problem with Ms. O'connor's emotional statement: her main premise was based on unproven allegations of guilt of the FBI's list of 19 suspects:

The foundation for her entire argument can be heard at minute mark 4:34, where Ms. Connor says:

"...and I have to acknowledge that the pain I am feeling essentially comes from 19 individual criminals who murdered 3,000 people on our soil, and it has left us horrifically scared." [emphasis mine]

But, there is no proof that the FBI's list of ALLEGED hijackers were indeed guilty of the crimes and murders on 9/11/01.  Or, indeed if they were even aboard the airplanes that day.

It is simply not a matter of fact that the FBI solved the crime when it named 19 suspects.  The guilt of the FBI's suspects in this case has never been confirmed.

Watch Ms. O'connor's statement in its entirety in the following video:


She is doing a good thing by

She is doing a good thing by putting out this statement because islamophobia is fueling the public to support the wars, and she is standing up as a family member saying that islam is not responsible, rather INDIVIDUAL CRIMINALS are. By emphasizing that the attacks were criminal acts and not acts of war she advances the message that 911 is best dealt with as a criminal justice matter which means having a criminal investigation, the larger goal of the movement. Be careful not to vilify the positive things happening in the media, things like this are small victories.

The best lies are mostly truth...

She still perpetuates the myth that the 19 Muslim guys with box cutters are the perps. That is not a good thing.

Boy do I agree with you ROB

I just love Donn Marsh O'Connor but she has to know that 9/11 was an inside job. How could she not know? I don't get it.

I thought she was on the side of truth?

I was pretty surprised when I heard that statement as I watched this piece live. I could've sworn she was supportive of 9/11 truth and was aware of all the evidence against the OCT. I was disappointed. I was hoping she'd appeal to Kieth to look for the truth, not just perpetuate the myth. sad really

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
“We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.” - Albert Einstein

WARNING to commenters: keep it civil

(not directed at you dtg86)

This is going to be a contentious thread. People's facts, opinions and behavior- including choice of words/phrasing- are open to criticism, but do not label people with insults, and refrain from accusations and ad homs.


As a moderator, you shouldn't employ a double standard. In fact, the moderator team here at 911blogger is squarely to blame for allowing this post to exist in the first place.

You remove my reply, yet allow this slander about Donna Marsh O'Connor to stand:

"NOONE has the right to be ignorant and agnostic as to the crimes committed on 9-11. I read her remarks as a rather clear endorsment [sic] of the official story. And that´s a grave betrayal of those slaughtered on 9-11-2001. " — Dave Mann

Why? And why isn't this whole article removed? Are you concerned for (whatever remains of the) credibility of 911blogger at all?

my view

there isnt charged language in the OP; it makes factual observations about Donna's comments on MSNBC and makes an important point about the lack of hard evidence that the named 19 were responsible for the attacks. It's significant and worth discussing, though in my opinion it's a mistake to be focusing on Donna Marsh O'Connor rather then those who've cultivated and exploited the 9/11 myth and the cover up.

Moderation is subjective and imperfect, and most situations are not black and white. In my opinion- and I might be convinced otherwise- Dave saying Donna's remarks are a betrayal is off-base and repugnant, and should be voted down and objected to. Saying this about a 9/11 family member is disrespectful and reflects poorly on Dave and the truth movement by extension, though it seems clear that Dave's very strongly worded view is not shared even by those that are disappointed by what Donna said. I'm not sure it amounts to libel or a rules violation- it's an opinion, and doesn't attack Donna as much as criticize her action. I'm listening if you want to explain why it should be removed.

Your comment amounted to a personal attack and was directly insulting to another user- removing it and posting a warning will hopefully keep things from escalating. Everyone here is free to criticize people's evidence and arguments and behavior- including the moderators and 911Blogger- but keep it civil.

Donna Marsh O'Connor

is a courageous woman, an inspiration and a role model.

I am deeply embarrassed by 911blogger at this time, choosing to feature this garbage on the front page.

And it's Keith Olbermann, not Obermann. (I see it has been corrected) And he's a liberal, not a conservative.

I'm with you

But this isn't the first time I've been embarrassed by fellow 'truthers' who purport to know the whole story. I sense a deep vein of ignorance regarding the use of patsies by governments over the years. People claiming that Donna Marsh O'Connor is supporting the 'official story' have short memories, or haven't bothered to familiarize themselves with some of the things she has said and done over the years.

For self styled investigators, I'm kind of disappointed.

Donna Marsh O'Connor has been an inspiration to me

however I am deeply disappointed. Her comments in this case will be interpreted as supporting the official story of 19 hijackers by the average viewer. I can support the woman, I can admire her, I can try to feel her pain, but I cannot deny my true feeling of disappointment. Sorry.

Calling something "garbage"

and calling someone an "inspiration and role model" are strictly impressionistic remarks and do not address the issue. NOONE has the right to be ignorant and agnostic as to the crimes committed on 9-11. I read her remarks as a rather clear endorsment of the official story. And that´s a grave betrayal of those slaughtered on 9-11-2001.

Official story?

dave mann said.. "I read her remarks as a rather clear endorsment of the official story."

I'm so sick of hearing this nonsense. Guess what? If you think her comments were a "clear endorsment of the official story" then you're gonna love my comments.

From the article above...."But, there is no proof that the FBI's list of ALLEGED hijackers were indeed guilty of the crimes and murders on 9/11/01. Or, indeed if they were even aboard the airplanes that day."

1. Ted Olson is a victim of the 9-11 attacks. His wife is dead because she stayed in Washington as long as she could and left that morning so she could at least spend breakfast time with her husband Ted, even though she had an appointment on the west coast. She did that because 9-11 was his birthday. His wife is dead, which makes him a victim of the attacks whether you or DRG like him or not.

2. Lloyde England was damned near killed by that plane that "truthers" refuse to admit hit the pentagon.

3. There were hijackers on the planes. How do I know? Because there were a bunch of phone calls from the planes which prove it.

4. Flight 93 was not shot down. How do I know that? Because people watched it go down and they didn't see another plane shoot a missile at it.

See? I must be "endorsing the official story" huh? How about this....Oswald didn't kill Kennedy because Oswald didn't exist. That sounds pretty dumb to me, but not as dumb as some of the things I have to listen to from so called "truthers.

In regards to points 3 and paraphrase MLK "I have a dream"

I have a dream that some day so called truthers will stop attacking the victims of 9-11 and start doing their homework and realize that saying "the phone calls are fake" only covers up the fact that when Rice called Bush BEFORE he stepped into the classroom they both pretended that they thought it was a "weird accident", that a PASSENGER JET slammed into the WTC when the FAA and military both knew it was a hijacking BECAUSE OF THE AIRPHONE CALLS FROM THE PLANES.

I have a dream, that someday so called "truthers" will realize that saying flight 93 was shot down only helps cover up the fact that NO SHOOT DOWN ORDERS WERE ISSUED DURING THE 9-11 ATTACKS.

I have a dream that some day so called "truthers" will admit that not only were there hijackers, but they were known about and let in the country by the CIA and Saudi Agents being paid by Prince Bandar Bush were assisting them.

I have a dream that someday so called "truthers' would stop blaming 9-11 on the victims of 9-11 and denounce and never allow disgusting BS like this to exist on the internet.....



Extreme positions and strong language are unhelpful- imho

dave mann: "NOONE has the right to be ignorant and agnostic as to the crimes committed on 9-11. I read her remarks as a rather clear endorsment of the official story. And that´s a grave betrayal of those slaughtered on 9-11-2001."

People are ignorant about 9/11, and as long as the public doesn't have all the facts, people are going to remain agnostic about the 'truth' of what happened. Calling Donna's remarks a "betrayal" is, imho, extreme- this kind of position will likely alienate those inquiring into 9/11 and who may otherwise be open-minded or even be allies. Donna spent years agitating for truth and justice while America slept, and while people convinced they knew the 'truth' promoted misinformation and speculative claims as fact, and helped to discredit the movement.

JFK assassination was an inside job too!

Oswald was a legend. National Security memo 273 issued by Johnson to reverse NSM 263 issued by JFK, was found in draft form at the LBJ library dated a day before Kennedy was killed.

Can you elaborate on that peacefulwarrior?



There were multiple Oswalds so in the intelligence business this is known as a legend. The Nat Security Memo 263 signed by JFK in Oct was about withdrawing thousands of advisers out of Vietnam and eventually leaving. JFK deliberately did not make this order public because he didn't want it to look like he was soft on communism prior to the election. A few days after he was killed LBJ reversed NSM 263 with a new memo 273. Years later in the LBJ library a draft of memo 273 was discovered dated the day before the assissination when LBJ was still VP! This is the smoking gun which I think implicates LBJ as one of the co-conspriators. Even JFK's secretary Mrs. Lincoln stated that she felt that the FBI,CIA and LBJ were all in on the murder, though most documentaries leave her comments out don't they. Jim Marrs documents this all fairly well in a documentary called Proof , Oswald did not kill JFK.



Overly Sentimental

While it's polite to be sympathetic to those who lost family members, there's no excuse for Donna's non-factual public opinion - an opinion that hurts the whole movement. It's not a question of tolerance for Islam either. The whole issue of putting a mosque at the WTC site area is pure propaganda concocted by the real perpetrators of the attack to cause a media war and distract from the truth about the attacks.

You are right snowcrash.

You are right snowcrash. Seeing this post and some of the supportive comments is sad and dissappointing. This movement needs to grow, not close ranks. Are those authors who are slamming her of the view that the movement needs to be more "pure"? What the hell is that going to accomplish?

Since Jon is moderated..

he asked me to post this. It's his unadulterated reaction to seeing this posted on 911Blogger.


Does everyone know what this woman has lost? She lost her daughter, Vanessa Lang Langer who was 5 months pregnant, and 5 minutes late to the rest of her life.

Do you know how I know that? Because of how much Donna Marsh O'Connor did for the so called 9/11 Truth Movement.

There's so much more, and let's not forget the first time we heard from Donna Marsh O'Connor. (pay special attention to the website that's displayed.)


She's not allowed to move on with her life? She's not allowed to try and find some semblance of peace? She has to be harassed because some individual has a theory about 9/11 that is contradicted by available information that any normal human could see if they opened their fucking eyes?

This is an absolute disgrace, and I'm ashamed to be affiliated with it.

Jon Gold


The proposed mosque is a manufactured political football.

It is a propaganda tool being used to ramp up anti-Muslim sentiments ahead of the possible invasion of Iran.

She, Donna Marsh-O'Connor, has done a lot that we can be grateful for. I am grateful to the Jersey Girls for all that they have done to help us get this far. I applaud their hard work and tenacity in getting the 911 Commission to happen. She, Donna Marsh-O'Connor, deserves respect and honor for her past works. I am truly sorry for the loss of her daughter.

Still, I am disappointed that she makes the statement about 19 guys as if it were a fact. This may have been ok, if she would have qualified them as patsies and finished the thought by speaking about the stand down of NORAD or some other piece of information that would show that she doesn't buy the official conspiracy theory, hook line and sinker. She did not. From that video, one would believe that she totally believes the official conspiracy theory. Is this her real position? If it is, then why has she helped the 911 Truth movement? If it isn't her position, then she contradicted whatever position she maintains, by omission, with the statement to K O..

This is why I think it is not a good thing.

The original post correctly states that

O´Connor´s statement about 19 terrorists attacking us on "our soil" was in error. For pointing that out we have to suffer the RIGHTEOUS IDIGNATION of people like Jon. How some of us are insensitive to her suffering, how embrarrassed they are, etc.
I think some of you need to just give it a rest and quit with the moralistic one-up-manship and melodrama.

Please tell Jon

I wholeheartedly agree.

Mosque an engineered distraction

It's not hard to see that this mosque bizzo is an engineered distraction designed to foster bigotry and provide yet more fuel to the myth. Making any comment within the paradigm created by this deliberate distraction is therefore an unconscious manipulated puppet performance which is unhelpful to the movement.

That's why this is on Olbermann, and that's why it doesn't transmit any information of value. What else could we expect?

This is not about the compassion which undoubtedly Donna deserves to receive from the movement. It is about the misleading information transmitted by Donna on a popular current affairs program to millions of potential 911 Truth supporters. Only the truth matters. We are sticking to our fundamental goals and progressing our cause, and we act ethically also, in highlighting this matter.

Focus on the pols and pundits, not Donna and 9/11 activists

Among other things, Donna also said:

"I joined [September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows] in 2004, after ... really getting exhausted by some of the questions I had about ... why our government did one thing or another- and not- you know"

Donna says she joined this group because they were "going to walk away from Ground Zero and walk toward a better future" essentially because they're about building bridges and finding non-violent and diplomatic solutions to resentment, tension and conflict.

"We have politicians who've been capitalizing on the fear and hate-mongering- and let's face it- they've benefited from this. There is no way we would have been- the average American citizen- we would not have been ok with an invasion of Iraq, unless somehow the average American ... could point to Saddam Hussein and equate [him] with Osama Bin Laden."

"When people will accuse the president of the United States of being Muslim- the problem with the accusation is, in its nature, it means it's a crime- it's a problem!"

I'm glad Donna has pointed out how 9/11 has been used to strike fear into America, justify war and fuel the attitude that all Muslims are terrorists. She chose to use her 5 minutes to speak on issues related to truth, justice, peace, forgiveness, harmony and love. She framed 9/11 in the context of it being a crime perpetrated by 19 individuals- not as an act of war by Islam against the West- and not as an 'inside job' which used Bin Laden and the 19 as patsies.

I agree with the main thrust of her message- but I also agree that not calling into question the basic premise of 9/11- that it was Bin Laden and Al Qaeda alone- reinforces the 'America was attacked by Muslims' myth, and I think ultimately this is defeating her cause.

She also talked about acknowledging white privilege and the disaffection of African American youth- she could have also acknowledged that US foreign policy, in particular the one-sided support for Israel against the Palestinians, and support for dictatorial Muslim regimes that serve US interests- breeds resentment and hatred among Muslims, and has made the US a target. This is why 9/11 is believable to those on the left- this was the premise of Chomsky's book '9/11' .

Picking 9/11 apart is complex, and there are more questions than definitive answers- and the truth movement has been discredited and disrupted by people pushing questionable and clearly bogus claims, and taking extreme positions. Donna appears to have moved on, and is doing the best she can to make a better world, the best way she knows how. Perhaps if so many in the 9/11 truth movement hadn't latched on to dubious claims like faked phone calls, fake victims and witnesses, and AA 77 not hitting the Pentagon, the media would've had a harder time portraying the movement as being composed of irresponsible and misinformed people, and Donna would've felt comfortable using her 5 minutes to raise serious questions, and we would be further along towards getting people with integrity elected and an honest investigation into 9/11 and related crimes.

Since LV911Truth/Jeff Jacobucci/ started posting at 911blogger, he's been harping on this issue that there's no evidence that the named 19 were responsible. I agree it's important to remind people of the evidence that contradicts the claims Al Qaeda was solely responsible for carrying out the plot, and that the case they did is thin and weak- but confronting activists here at 911blogger on distinctions related to context not fact, and making an issue out of Donna Marsh O'Connor's statement- rather than focusing on the pundits and pols who've done the most to promote the 9/11 myth, and who are exploiting it (which Donna pointed out) - doesn't help the cause of truth and justice- imho.

When it comes to Govt cover-ups

the facts don't matter they never have. The media has known the truth for a long time now. Some of them even reported some of the truth during the JFK murder, the OK bombing, Waco, Iran Contra, the list goes on and on. The powers that run the show know that time is not on our side and never has been. They can easily stall for 30 years and even admit it like the Gulf of Tonkin and no one does shit about it. The real truth is that it's a bad man's world. What's a poor boy gonna do? Refuse to go to war, refuse to kill anybody, refuse to bomb anybody, teach your children peace.

I feel for this lady and I want justice because of the

deep impact it has had on her life and family. The big picture of a 911 Victims Family Group supporting the building of an islamic center in NYC is good,
very good. I commend the mission of promoting peaceful tommorrows.

However it is sad to hear her blame 19 criminals for the 911 crime. Which of the 19 criminals was responsible for the demolition of WTC7? Do some family members still not know about WTC7 or do they just not have the emotional capacity left to make an objective analysis?

Holy War!

I'm not a member of any religion, and I'm not an atheist. I'm not crazy about a mosque near ground zero, and I'm not crazy about this ad either.

Notice the cross, and keywords...fight-kill-mosque...

I think some want a good ol fashioned holy war. I'd prefer we put all the religious fanatics on an island and let them kill each other, and the last one standing gets a free crappy hut in Jerusalem.


I miss the sanity around here. If "truthers" find themselves attacking a woman like Donna Marsh O'Connor then they should really take a breath, sit down, and consider finding another calling than 9/11 research and activism. The woman is a heroine. Whoever attacks her, directly or indirectly, explicitly or implicitly, gets about as much respect from me as I have for Troy Sexton. Less than zero. And I'm really trying to make an expletive-free statement here. I bet nobody here opening his/her big fat yap has really watched the links zombie bill hicks posted on behalf of Jon. Did they even know or care who Donna is? So Donna didn't scream "9/11 was an inside job" on Keith Olbermann? So what? She was in Jesse Ventura's 9/11 episode, irrespective of the quality of that show, she went out there and did it. She's been on the 9/11 truth barricades for how long now? And this is her thanks?

I want everybody to ask themselves: what would you say to Donna's face? What would you say? Are you going to tell her your fancy little no hijacker theory with your DRG book in your hand? Will you bring your little Thierry Meyssan and Webster Tarpley books to "prove" to her she is "ignorant" about 9/11? My stomach turns at the utterly breathtaking stupidity and intellectual laziness displayed here.


In another thread, LV911Truth simply hand waved half of History Commons with circular logic. The irony? Webster Tarpley's books, DRG's books, they all lean heavily on this timeline.

The "Official story"

I hear ya. It reminds me of when Lt Col Anthony Shaffer was interviewed by Alex Jones and stated that he didn't just identify 3 of the 4 Al Qaeda cells in America, but that they were aware they were not "sleeper" cells, but active, in America and were going to do something. Then was pulled off, and told "this isn't your job".

And what did I see in the comments section?

"You can't trust him, he supports the "Official story" that there were hijackers."
"He's military, and probably "in on it'.
and then golden gems like....

"We need whistleblowers to come forth" LOL! How embarrassing!

This is extrememly valuable info he is giving and look at the thanks he gets from "truthers".

The hardcore conspiracy theorist with a big mouth does more damage to 9-11 truth than any so called debunker, and the days of the rest of us putting up with it are over.

If you take what she said in this interview as truth...

then there is no reason to have a 911 Truth Movement. Do you think those that watch Keith Olberman had their belief in the OCT reinforced or challenged by her statement?

Another Point of View

Has anyone here in this forum ever been the victim of an identity theft? Credit cards stolen while on a vacation, etc? Or, know someone very close to you who has? If so, how did that feel, to you or to that person? It can be pretty scary when that happens, yes?

The UK Telegraph reported on 9/23/01 that four 'innocent men' were 'shocked' to learn their identities had been 'stolen' and then turned into fake identities for patsies for 9/11 crimes.

For example, take identity-theft victim Mr. Al-Ghamdi of Riyadh. The Telegraph reported:

"Mr Al-Ghamdi was named as a terrorist on the United Airlines flight that crashed in Pennsylvania - a plane said by some experts to have been heading for the White House.

He first knew that he was on the FBI's list when he was told by a colleague. Speaking from Tunisia, he said: "I was completely shocked. For the past 10 months I have been based in Tunis with 22 other pilots learning to fly an Airbus 320. The FBI provided no evidence of my presumed involvement in the attacks.

'You cannot imagine what it is like to be described as a terrorist - and a dead man - when you are innocent and alive.' The airline was angry too. Officials brought Mr Al-Ghamdi back to Saudi Arabia last week for a 10-day holiday to avoid arrest or interrogation.

An official said: 'We are consulting lawyers about what action to take to protect the reputation of our pilots.' Mr Al-Ghamdi faced further embarrassment when CNN, the American television network, flashed a photograph of him around the world, naming him as a hijack suspect."

Mr. Al-Ghamdi is a VICTIM of 9/11 crimes - just, perhaps, not in the way we conventionally think about them. He is a victim of identity theft (a crime many of us can tell stories about, I'm sure) and it reportedly affected his life in a very real way - perhaps, not as horrifically as for those who lost a loved one or who developed asbestos lung problems, but in a serious way, none-the-less.

Read full article

If we are really objective then:

Christianity may be considered the most dangerous religion: From Constantine to the Crusades, The Inquisition, the slaugter of North and South American Native cultures, and the recent plunder of Iraq. I am sure this was never the polictics of Jesus but the case is clearly documented that blood for christ can be about fanatical christians, and have nothing what so ever to do with the philosophy taught in the name of Jesus.

Off topic, but...

Yes! Of course, sure. I whole-heartedly agree and I like your way of thinking. You have an open mind.

To perhaps bring the discussion back: it is of course possible to be a faithful, church-going Christian and NOT support those things - say, the Inquisition, if you lived back then. Because you know they twisted Jesus' teachings around. Similarly, I would argue, it's just like today, you can be a patriotic American, love your country, and of course you can openly question the "official story," because you saw Richard Gage's Blueprint for Truth and you KNOW the crimes just ain't what they said they were lol.

In fact, I must make my two statements even stronger: if you lived back then, it would have been your OBLIGATION as a CHRISTIAN to oppose the Inquisition, just as many people today feel it is their OBLIGATION as PATRIOTIC AMERICANS to pursue real truth and justice for the 9/11 crimes.

I felt it was in the context of religion bashing as it

relates to an Islamic center near ground zero. And of course the comments made by Ms. Oconnor with respect to the terror of 911. The Bush Cheney gang who played the right wing Christian block like a fiddle has and still is responsible for spreading some of the worst terror the world has seen. Certainly the US's weapons of mass destruction unleashed just in the last decade have caused incalcuable misery and chaos. And what about the torture in the name of national security. Not to minimize the deaths associated with the 911 attacks in the US, but how many americans many of them calling themselves Christians have any conception of the destruction caused by the US. Even the blackwater leader considered himself on some kind of holy mission similar to the crusaders. How many unthinking Christians today feel that the continued destruction of the middle east is necessary to set the stage for the return of Christ. There are lots of people who have told me 911 doesn't matter as these are the end of days etc. How many of them will support an attack on Iran and support Israel's propaganda in claiming the holy land as it's own.

To bring the topic back to your recent comment it is up to the Christians of today to forgive and love their enemies and restrict their children from becoming warriors would you agree?

And, why are we fighting in

And, why are we fighting in the first place?

Actuellement, here in France there is a campaign against Islam

Herblay FRANCE

here in France, this last week, there has been a week of national anti-Islamic propaganda ( the mosque in New York and the stoning of the Iranian woman being the starting point. ). I think it is no accident but a deliberate attempt to increase the hatred against the Muslins leading up to the next abominable memory day the 11th of September 2010. In France seen the reactions shown on the national television stations, it is working !

Every year that passes, each 11th of September, we hear of new lies told by Bush, new information on what really happened, new videos taken that day, new documentaries which help us to open our eyes and see the facts for ourselves.

Today for millions ( hundreds of millions ?) of citizens in the world it was not the Muslims that are responsible for the 9/11 attacks but a part of the Bush government. And when we say it today we are not insulted, badly treated, made jobless, treated anti-semitic, ( assassinated Barry Jennings ?) like some years ago.

And the only way to stop the 9/11 truth coming out in the open for everyone is to increase the hatred against the Muslims.

However I am asking myself if the propagandist's have not gone too far this time and soon they will have to cope with a backlash where the Muslims are going to ask by millions for a real investigation into the 9/11 attacks.



I'd Love to See It.

"However I am asking myself if the propagandist's have not gone too far this time and soon they will have to cope with a backlash where the Muslims are going to ask by millions for a real investigation into the 9/11 attacks."

Yes, I, too

would love to see that! Thank you very much for posting, John!